--0-832791027-1131324021=:71265
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
That is pretty bad that you got no response back. Mabe he's embarrassed that
he doesn't have an answer ... or maybe he's still in the process of trying to
figure it out. Anyway, I understand it was only a thought on your part and
that you don't see a need to jump to this sort of conclusion.
Also, thanks for the response to my response to Michelle, it was well said,
exactly the points I was making/attempting to make.
melanie
Lisa Hsu wrote:
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
--0-832791027-1131324021=:71265
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
That is pretty bad that you got no response back. Mabe he's embarrassed that
he doesn't have an answer ... or maybe he's still in the process of trying to
figure it out. Anyway, I understand it was only a thought on your part and
that you don't see a need to jump to this sort of conclusion.
Also, thanks for the response to my response to Michelle, it was well said,
exactly the points I was making/attempting to make.
melanie Lisa Hsu <lisashoe Æ gmail.com> wrote:
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 l!
ooking
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. b!
ut 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
--0-832791027-1131324021=:71265--
|
