North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: net-loss (was RE: attention net-grrls)
Ya know I thought of trying to snap off yet another funny quip, quiping is of course what I do best (well there are other things but typing gets.... nevermind) , and to my dismay I actually thought about what she and later Danielle were saying - and then I parsed the list of female co-workers I've had in the field to date (no pun - cut it out now - man this serious stuff is killing me - so much *good* material here - so much immaturity wasted on this serious stuff - anyway...) I thought of each of them and to be honest I can only recall 1 or 2 that was really *any* good (what definitions I'm using for good actually seems to be the problem here that we're all missing). However as I sat down and hummed my 'Opressions, suppression, it's OK...' mantra at my keboard - I then also parsed the men that I have worked with/hired - and to be honest they weren't all that much better - especially if dismissed the way that some of the grrls ( to borrow the term) were, and if applied to that same moshed up definition I tried to use whenI parsed the ladies... Cmon lets be honest - the same tags get applied - though the linguistics change - our terms were just as stoopid as any other of the Nerdolution's: the ole booth babe at trade shows, one of my favortie has always been 'pincushion' (you do the math) - but the point is I'm leaning toward these 'grrls' as having a point here - they have had it rougher than the us over thirty stalky pony-railed red-heads... and all the rest of you neo-hippie wanna-be's too... they started out in the hole catching deuces (man I love using that line in a sentence) - sure we usually trash the new *guy* but at some point the new *guy* becomes one of the company squaler - but the new *grrrl* is usually not allowed in all the reindeer games (mostly because they invlove the gents huddled around the big NOC monitor critiquing the latest mpeg - ah to be young, dumb and full of gum... Man am I an hr nightmare - this actually set out to make a point... Anyway - keep the faith sistahhhhs... -- I am nothing if not net-Q! - [email protected] On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Rachel Luxemburg wrote: > > Until you've spent a couple of years being the only woman in the room at > meetings and other business events, you really don't understand how > different the feeling is to be someplace, even virtually, where everyone is > like you. > > I suspect that men who hold or have held jobs in overwhelmingly female > fields have the best chance of grokking this issue. Or, of course, other > minorities (you could count the number of black employees at my employer's > HQ on one hand). > > If you feel threatened or offended by the fact that some women feel a need > to have some space for themselves, I'm sorry for you. But to call it sexist > or counterproductive just shows how little you understand the issue. > > > > > ============================================== > Rachel Luxemburg [email protected] > Visit SoundAmerica http://soundamerica.com > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of > [email protected] > Sent: Friday, June 09, 2000 9:58 AM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: OT: net-loss (was RE: attention net-grrls) > > > > > Gee, I thought that IP, BGP, DNS, ACLs, and so on worked the same for women > as for men. > > One of the main reasons I'm on this list is to learn from the experiences > and expertise of others - male -and- female. > > You're of course free to do as you wish, but I personally think the whole > idea of a 'Women in Networking' list is absurd, revanchist, and sexist (to > use the politically correct terminology currently in vogue amongst those who > claim to be striving for 'equality', yet who seem to do everything they can > to claim that they themselves have 'special needs' and so on, which of > course undermines the rationale their supposedly egalitarian agenda). > > Technology works the same for everyone, regardless of gender, race, creed, > or color; that's one of the beautiful things about it. Consciously erecting > artificial boundaries where none need exist strikes me as being laughably > archaic, and ultimately counterproductive. > > But, hey, what do I know? After all, I'm just a member of the oppressive > patriachy, dedicated to keeping females barefoot, naked, and in the > wiring-closet, right? Talk about your stereotyping. > > Sorry for the rant, but this sort of thing strikes me as being inimical to > the spirit of the Net in general, and this list in particular. I'll shut > up, now. > >
|