North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: attention net-grrls

  • From: John Butler
  • Date: Mon Jun 12 12:16:34 2000

Thus spake J.D. Falk ([email protected]):
>I don't want to start a flamewar here, and I don't really care
>that much myself, but I'd just like to point out that if anyone 
>started a "men in networking" list, they'd be immediately flamed 
>and lambasted by people of both sexes.

But what would be the point of such a list? To discuss the effects of single 
mode fiber on prostate health? I don't see how there would be any interest.

During the early 90s, when sexual harassment suits were in vogue, and when
self-annointed "diversity facilitators" were milking corporations and
universities left and right, I used to resent the presumptuous idea of
people booking lecture halls [I was a student at the time] and forming groups
to essentially air dirty laundry under the auspices of conducting legitimate
academic discussions. But it would be even more presumptuous to entertain the
idea of stopping them.

This effort seems different. It's a voluntary thing, and having worked around
several of the kinds of people that make a woman's work environment less than
inviting, I can understand where efforts like this are coming from. NANOG is
not an inappropriate forum to announce it.

NANOG is also *not* an inappropriate forum to announce a "Men in Networking"
discussion list; the only difference is that whereas the women's list would
draw interest from a few women, the men's list would likely draw no interest
whatsoever. Not unlike something as silly as "White People in Networking."