------=_Part_32513_4720648.1131294522008
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
i would say that i'm a regular old liberal feminist. i've never been one to
be extreme about anything, i'm sort of of the "can't we all just get along"
school, and i really do just hope for a society one day where everyone can
just BE who they want to be without social pressures to be something else.
however, on some level i do understand that for this to happen there has to
be some radical action, but i'm somehwat inherently an unradically minded
person so i can't imagine being a radical feminist because it seems
so....dramatic and extreme and...well, radical.
however, i will agree with victoria and say that being "not a feminist but
not *not* a feminist" is somewhat of a copout answer. you either think women
are full human beings with rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of
happiness, whatever form that may take, or you don't. if someone were to ask
you, "do you think it's acceptable that your daughter/mother/sister is
unfairly treated in way X because she's a woman?" you can't possibly have a
neutral reaction. you either think it sucks and shouldn't be that way or you
think it's just the way it is and it's fine. in this sense, i think everyone
is at heart a feminist except for misogynists. but i suppose i am an
optimist as well as a feminist.
tangentially related...the other day i faced what i imagine to be my very
first explicitly and maddeningly negative experience as a woman in CS. i was
having problems getting some open-source code to work in a certain
environment, so i posted to a mailing list devoted to that code with my
situation and questions. i did mess up and have to send two emails, one that
said, "hi, i'm trying to X in environment Y, but i'm having problem Z", and
another that said, "oops, i meant problem Z*, where module A and module B
are failing to load".
now, i'd perused that mailing list for a while before posting, i had done
all my homework, it wasn't a dumb question, and the group seemed like a
helpful group, so i was sure i'd get a good response. instead, i got "well,
you see, there are two modules, module A and module B."
which i thought was pretty obvious since my error acknowledged both of them .
that is all i ever got out of the list. that guy's response was essentially
like, "well see, this is a COMPUTER." well, maybe not that bad, but i was so
filled with indignation and rage at this response, because it essentially
assumed i was an IDIOT and i'm NOT. i'm getting upset now just thinking
about it. i even had a friend acknowledge it probably would have been better
if i'd signed my name L. Hsu or Larry Hsu or something.
I'd never faced anything like this before because most people i interact
with i have MET, or something about my qualifications precedes our
interaction. but here on the anonymous net, they have no idea that my
question is worth thinking about and considering, and it was totally blown
off. which means we really haven't made any progress, in a vacuum, a girl
posting to a geek mailing list probably doesn't know shit.
it's all the worse because later, some guy posted something like, "hi i'm
totally new to this, can someone help me figure out this problem?" and
another guy wrote, "it's ok! we all start somewhere, try this!" what a nice
friendly response to what i thought was a much dumber question than mine
because i had run into the same thing and figured out how to solve it myself
in about 20 minutes. yet he got such a friendly reception.
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.
this has now degenerated into an online rant, and i will cease to do so now .
lisa
On 11/5/05, Michelle Sternthal wrote:
>
> I am a feminist, proud to call myself that. I would even identify myself
> as a
> radical feminist. Not to the extent that I attribute all blame to men
> or argue
> for a matriarchy, but to the extent that I think merely equalizing pay or
> assuring equal representation in our political and judicial spheres will
> NOT
> solve the problem of mysogyny. I think that the very institutions in which
> we
> live currently foster discriminiation/oppression; a fundamental
> reexamination
> of hidden assumptions and social norms emerging from these institutions is
> neccessary to get to a new place. What does that mean in reality? Well,
> for
> example, the concept of professionalism in society and the values it
> fosters--
> individualism, excessive consumption, a hierarchical system of work in
> which 1
> form of intelligence is prioritized-- creates a system in which women must
> fit
> into traditional patriarchical roles in order to equalize. The notion of
> work/family strain, or the very nuclear family, reflects the remnants of
> traditional patriarchy. one can think of alternative models of work or
> kinship
> ((extended family, think of the kibbutz) in which women would not have to
> face
> this struggle or where other skills would be valued.
>
> Let's think of gender conceptions, and which institutions encourage
> these roles.
> From pre-birth, our children are given a gender. Religion, schools,
> everywhere
> with a public bathroom, highlight this distinction as one of the most
> important
> in society. To equalize the playing field, we must address these
> institutions
> as well and the messages they send....
>
> In order to "subvert the dominant gender paradigm" (that's for you,
> Bethany and
> Danny) simply demanding laws to equalize pay will not be enough. The
> ideology
> behind this inequity must also be addressed. this is a war not of the law
> but
> of the mind....
>
> michelle
>
>
> Quoting Daniel Reeves :
>
> > Quick show of hands for your basic attitude towards feminism (and
> > also I'm curious who all is reading along)?
> >
> > http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves/improvetheworld
> >
> > Don't forget to hit submit on the whiteboard. If you don't know what
> > that means, just read the poll at the link above and email me your
> > (ideally one-word) response.
> >
> > Thanks y'all!
> > Danny
> >
> > --
> > http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves - - google://"Daniel Reeves"
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Michelle Sternthal
> Joint Doctoral Program in Sociology & Public Policy
> University of Michigan
> 734-709-6650 (cell)
> mjste Æ umich.edu
>
> "We, unaccustomed to courage/ exiles from delight/ live coiled in shells
> of
> loneliness/ until love leaves its high holy temple/ and comes into our
> sight/
> to liberate us into life."
> --Maya Angelou
>
>
>
------=_Part_32513_4720648.1131294522008
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
i would say that i'm a regular old liberal feminist. i've never
been one to be extreme about anything, i'm sort of of the "can't we all
just get along" school, and i really do just hope for a society one day
where everyone can just BE who they want to be without social pressures
to be something else. however, on some level i do understand that
for this to happen there has to be some radical action, but i'm
somehwat inherently an unradically minded person so i can't imagine
being a radical feminist because it seems so....dramatic and extreme
and...well, radical.
however, i will agree with victoria and say that being "not a feminist
but not *not* a feminist" is somewhat of a copout answer. you
either think women are full human beings with rights to life, liberty,
and pursuit of happiness, whatever form that may take, or you
don't. if someone were to ask you, "do you think it's acceptable
that your daughter/mother/sister is unfairly treated in way X because
she's a woman?" you can't possibly have a neutral reaction. ;
you either think it sucks and shouldn't be that way or you think it's
just the way it is and it's fine. in this sense, i think everyone is at
heart a feminist except for misogynists. but i suppose i am an
optimist as well as a feminist.
tangentially related...the other day i faced what i imagine to be my
very first explicitly and maddeningly negative experience as a woman in
CS. i was having problems getting some open-source code to work
in a certain environment, so i posted to a mailing list devoted to that
code with my situation and questions. i did mess up and have to
send two emails, one that said, "hi, i'm trying to X in environment Y,
but i'm having problem Z", and another that said, "oops, i meant
problem Z*, where module A and module B are failing to load".
now, i'd perused that mailing list for a while before posting, i had
done all my homework, it wasn't a dumb question, and the group seemed
like a helpful group, so i was sure i'd get a good response. instead, i
got "well, you see, there are two modules, module A and module B." ;
which i thought was pretty obvious since my error acknowledged both of
them. that is all i ever got out of the list. that
guy's response was essentially like, "well see, this is a
COMPUTER." well, maybe not that bad, but i was so filled with
indignation and rage at this response, because it essentially assumed i
was an IDIOT and i'm NOT. i'm getting upset now just thinking
about it. i even had a friend acknowledge it probably would have
been better if i'd signed my name L. Hsu or Larry Hsu or something.
I'd never faced anything like this before because most people i
interact with i have MET, or something about my qualifications precedes
our interaction. but here on the anonymous net, they have no idea
that my question is worth thinking about and considering, and it was
totally blown off. which means we really haven't made any
progress, in a vacuum, a girl posting to a geek mailing list probably
doesn't know shit.
it's all the worse because later, some guy posted something like, "hi
i'm totally new to this, can someone help me figure out this
problem?" and another guy wrote, "it's ok! we all start
somewhere, try this!" what a nice friendly response to what i
thought was a much dumber question than mine because i had run into the
same thing and figured out how to solve it myself in about 20 minutes.
yet he got such a friendly reception.
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.
this has now degenerated into an online rant, and i will cease to do so now .
lisa On 11/5/05, Michelle Sternthal < mjste Æ umich.edu >
wrote:
I am a feminist, proud to call myself that. I would even identify myself as a
radical feminist. Not to the extent that I attribute all blame to men or
argue for a matriarchy, but to the extent that I think merely equalizing pay
or
assuring equal representation in our political and judicial spheres will NOT
solve the problem of mysogyny. I think that the very institutions in which we
live currently foster discriminiation/oppression; a fundamental reexamination
of hidden assumptions and social norms emerging from these institutions is
neccessary to get to a new place. What does that mean in reality ? Well, for
example, the concept of professionalism in society and the values it fosters--
individualism, excessive consumption, a hierarchical system of work in which
1 form of intelligence is prioritized-- creates a system in which women must
fit into traditional patriarchical roles in order to equalize . The notion of
work/family strain, or the very nuclear family, reflects the remnants of
traditional patriarchy. one can think of alternative models of work or
kinship ((extended family, think of the kibbutz) in which women would not have
to face
this struggle or where other skills would be valued. Let's think of gender
conceptions, and which institutions encourage these roles. From pre-birth, our
children are given a gender. Religion, schools ,
everywhere with a public bathroom, highlight this distinction as one of the
most important in society. To equalize the playing field , we must address
these institutions as well and the messages they send ....
In order to "subvert the dominant gender paradigm" (that's for you, Bethany
and Danny) simply demanding laws to equalize pay will not be enough. The
ideology behind this inequity must also be addressed. this is a war not of
the law but
of the mind.... michelle Quoting Daniel Reeves < dreeves Æ
umich.edu >: > Quick show of hands for your basic attitude towards
feminism (and > also I'm curious who all is reading along)?
> > http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves/improvetheworld > ; >
Don't forget to hit submit on the whiteboard. If you don 't know what
> that means, just read the poll at the link above and email me your >
(ideally one-word) response. > > Thanks y'all! > Danny > > --
>
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves - - google ://"Daniel Reeves" >
> > -- Michelle Sternthal Joint Doctoral Program in Sociology &
Public Policy University of Michigan
734-709-6650 (cell) mjste Æ umich.edu "We, unaccustomed to courage/
exiles from delight/ live coiled in shells of loneliness/ until love leaves
its high holy temple/ and comes into our sight/
to liberate us into life." --Maya Angelou
------=_Part_32513_4720648.1131294522008--
|
