------=_Part_34130_4354564.1131319841678
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
ok, this is my last email for a while - i have work to do!
but anyway, yes, i did reply, almost immediately, with "yes, as you can see
from my error message neither of the modules loaded correctly, even though i
compiled both."
i didn't get any reply from that. anyway, i realize i dont' actually know
what was going on in his head when he responded. i can never know. and i've
never been one to jump to conclusions about things. if there's one thing i
can't stand it's when people do things like, "i'm going to sue the police
department for racism, they only arrested me because i'm black!" when really
they were arrested because they were pissing on a public street or
something. i feel like i generally give people the benefit of the doubt when
things like this come into question.
i think the reason why this bothered me so much was because i really did
read the archives a lot, and i was so sure i'd get a friendly and helpful
response because almost every thread i read consisted of friendly and
helpful responses, regardless of how simple the questions were. and that
someone else who was also new to the mailing list got such a friendly
response not long after i had posted, when his question was about something
that i had long ago already figured out.
anyway, no, i am looking for incidents of genderism, or whatever you want to
call it. i did a panel about being a woman grad student in the engineering
and sciences last year, and when i arrived they said we were to talk about
bad incidents that came about because i was a girl. i ended up speaking last
partially becuase i couldn't think of anything. in general, i have never
faced anything negative ever in school/academics because of being a girl.
so, no, i don't think my feelings about this are becuase i was looking for
it. it's just somethign i feel like i had to conclude, although i
acknowledge i can never be sure.
On 11/6/05, Melanie Reeves wrote:
>
> In response to Lisa about her CS chat room response:
> Did you try to write that guy back, saying maybe, "duh, I acknowledged
> the two modules, now do you have a solution?" or something like that. To
> assume that the response was because you're a woman may be a stretch, or it
> may not, but you don't know for sure. Maybe he responded before seeing your
> 2nd post. To assume that anyone with a smart comment like that is a sexist
> is just as sexist. Plus, if he is sexist, wouldn't it behoove the world to
> attempt to show him that you're a female who does know what she's talking
> about and possibly change his view? I can see that his reponse was
> maddening. Sometimes people are just plain distracted or not thinking when
> they respond to email and totally miss points in what they're responding to .
> There are just so many reasons why he could have responded like that, so you
> shouldn't assume it's sexist. If you write back, he might apologize for
> being so obvious and give a decent response.
> Anything you're looking for, you'll find. It's how psychics stay in
> business. They tell people something that will happen to them and when it 's
> on your mind, you'll look for it, maybe subconsciously, but you'll look for
> it. "my psychic said I was going to have something wonderful happen to me ,
> this must be it." - and their belief in psycics is confirmed. "I think there
> must be sexism in the CS community and this guy must have been exuding it ."
> - and your belief that it exists is confirmed. If you didn't think sexism
> existed, you would have just wondered why this guy was such an idiot to
> respond like that, would have assumed he was either distracted, not
> thinking, or didn't see your 2nd response, and would have responded to him
> to get a better answer. If you didn't get a better answer, you'd either
> think he's an idiot and forget about it, or possibly, depending on how he
> responded, have the thought that maybe he was sexist.
> Melanie
>
> *Lisa Hsu * wrote:
>
> 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_34130_4354564.1131319841678
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
ok, this is my last email for a while - i have work to do!
but anyway, yes, i did reply, almost immediately, with "yes, as you can
see from my error message neither of the modules loaded correctly, even
though i compiled both."
i didn't get any reply from that. anyway, i realize i dont'
actually know what was going on in his head when he responded. i
can never know. and i've never been one to jump to conclusions
about things. if there's one thing i can't stand it's when people
do things like, "i'm going to sue the police department for
racism, they only arrested me because i'm black!" when really
they were arrested because they were pissing on a public street or
something. i feel like i generally give people the benefit of the
doubt when things like this come into question.
i think the reason why this bothered me so much was because i really
did read the archives a lot, and i was so sure i'd get a friendly and
helpful response because almost every thread i read consisted of
friendly and helpful responses, regardless of how simple the questions
were. and that someone else who was also new to the mailing list
got such a friendly response not long after i had posted, when his
question was about something that i had long ago already figured
out.
anyway, no, i am looking for incidents of genderism, or whatever you
want to call it. i did a panel about being a woman grad student
in the engineering and sciences last year, and when i arrived they said
we were to talk about bad incidents that came about because i was a
girl. i ended up speaking last partially becuase i couldn't think
of anything. in general, i have never faced anything negative
ever in school/academics because of being a girl. so, no, i don't
think my feelings about this are becuase i was looking for it.
it's just somethign i feel like i had to conclude, although i
acknowledge i can never be sure.
On 11/6/05, Melanie Reeves < melzafish Æ sbcglobal.net >
wrote:
In response to Lisa about her CS chat room response:
Did you try to write that guy back, saying maybe, "duh, I
acknowledged the two modules, now do you have a solution?" or
something like that. To assume that the response was because
you're a woman may be a stretch, or it may not, but you don't know for
sure. Maybe he responded before seeing your 2nd post. To
assume that anyone with a smart comment like that is a sexist is just
as sexist. Plus, if he is sexist, wouldn't it behoove the world
to attempt to show him that you're a female who does know what she's
talking about and possibly change his view? I can see that his
reponse was maddening. Sometimes people are just plain
distracted or not thinking when they respond to email and totally
miss points in what they're responding to. There
are just so many reasons why he could have responded like that, so
you shouldn't assume it's sexist. If you write back, he might
apologize for being so obvious and give a decent response.
Anything you're looking for, you'll find. It's how psychics
stay in business. They tell people something that will happen to
them and when it's on your mind, you'll look for it, maybe
subconsciously, but you'll look for it. "my psychic said I was
going to have something wonderful happen to me, this must be it." - and
their belief in psycics is confirmed. "I think there must be
sexism in the CS community and this guy must have been exuding
it." - and your belief that it exists is confirmed. If you didn't
think sexism existed, you would have just wondered why this guy was
such an idiot to respond like that, would have assumed he was either
distracted, not thinking, or didn't see your 2nd response, and would
have responded to him to get a better answer. If you didn't get a
better answer, you'd either think he's an idiot and forget about it, or
possibly, depending on how he responded, have the thought that maybe he
was sexist.
Melanie
Lisa Hsu < lisashoe Æ gmail .com > wrote:
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_34130_4354564.1131319841678--
|
