X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_10_20, HTML_MESSAGE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=no version=3.1.0 Sender: -1.2 (spamval) -- NONE Return-Path: Received: from newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id jA6GTDS8006836 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Sun, 6 Nov 2005 11:29:14 -0500 Received: from galaxyquest.mr.itd.umich.edu (galaxyquest.mr.itd.umich.edu [141.211.93.145]) by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.2/8.13.0) with ESMTP id jA6GTCdr002377 for ; Sun, 6 Nov 2005 11:29:12 -0500 Received: FROM wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.204]) BY galaxyquest.mr.itd.umich.edu ID 436E2F3A.517E9.23598 ; 6 Nov 2005 11:28:42 -0500 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 55so163122wri for ; Sun, 06 Nov 2005 08:28:42 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=CK3PJKyg3ECZt9qwC186p9y3oznoCtJHDPqPYr1ATcz+/hJnFT5L4982ua+G0h+l2FW5XgQggFCbW1MlN1ZvL1rkpYpSQ5O+goJddyA/H1Erc8wp1F7TFQOUiimzMP0WmK/j5/ilmmrZKAtrFLd+d+ppOaysspBCUIMYmQaWrRU= Received: by 10.65.75.11 with SMTP id c11mr4364610qbl; Sun, 06 Nov 2005 08:28:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.243.11 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Nov 2005 08:28:41 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <8d3580670511060828i30e69979v6a07e7c0e1d59cd6 Æ mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20051105235102.ju1h68g8gowo88sw Æ web.mail.umich.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_32513_4720648.1131294522008" References: <20051105235102.ju1h68g8gowo88sw Æ web.mail.umich.edu> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on newman.eecs.umich.edu X-Virus-Scan: : UVSCAN at UoM/EECS Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 11:28:42 -0500 To: Michelle Sternthal Cc: Daniel Reeves , improvetheworld Æ umich.edu From: Lisa Hsu Subject: Re: are you a feminist? Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 273 ------=_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 wome= n 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 as= k 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 yo= u think it's just the way it is and it's fine. in this sense, i think everyon= e 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 wa= s 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 tha= t 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 s= o 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 bette= r 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 mysel= f 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 whic= h > we > live currently foster discriminiation/oppression; a fundamental > reexamination > of hidden assumptions and social norms emerging from these institutions i= s > 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 mus= t > 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 al= l just get along" school, and i really do just hope for a society one da= y 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 sta= rt 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 <m= jste Æ umich.edu> wrote:
I am a feminist, proud to call myself that.  I would even identif= y myself as a
radical feminist.  Not to the extent that I attr= ibute all blame to men
or argue
for a matriarchy, but to the extent t= hat I think merely equalizing pay or
assuring equal representation in our political and judicial spheres wil= l NOT
solve the problem of mysogyny.  I think that the very in= stitutions 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 o= f
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, sch= ools,
everywhere
with a public bathroom, highlight this distinction as one of = the most
important
in society.  To equalize the playing fie= ld, we must address these institutions
as well and the messages they sen= d....

In order to "subvert the dominant gender paradigm" (that's fo= r 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>:

> Q= uick show of hands for your basic attitude towards feminism (and
> al= so I'm curious who all is reading along)?
>
> http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves/improvetheworld
&g= t;
> 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  - -  googl= e://"Daniel Reeves"
>
>
>



--
= Michelle Sternthal
Joint Doctoral Program in Sociology & Public Poli= cy
University of Michigan
734-709-6650 (cell)
mjste Æ umich.e= du

"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--