Happy Ada Lovelace Day!

[I. Khider]

Greetings, 

I am delighted there is spirited discussion with regards to the usage of
Linda Lovelace (Linda Boreman)and Ada Lovelace. In every bad, it seems
there are grains of good. Boreman had since gone on to advocate on
women's rights and highlight exploitation in the sex industry. The sex
industry is still largely based on opression, economic inequality
against women due to our largely patriarchal society and exploitation
(mainly of performers). I found Susan G. Cole's 'Pornography and the Sex
Crisis' an enlightening read. Lovelace/Boreman was cited several times
in Cole's work as performing under duress--a common practice in all sex
industries that thrive on poverty and weakness. 

Naturally there are many who strongly oppose said sentiments, just the
same it is good to bring it into dialog. Many developments in internet
communications are based on the sex industry, which says something about
our society. Margaret Atwood sugested in her essay 'On Pornography' that
there might not need to be any pornography if men and women (or any
other permutation of the two) if couples communicated better with each
other. An intriguing idea. The stigma of social alienation seems to
stick with computer entusiasts, but I believe this is symptomatic of
society at large. 

I am all for the empowerment of women and recognizing them for their
achievements. As for Lovelace/Boreman's efforts later in life, she did
try to empower women by letting the world know of her duress, and
consequently most women in the sex industry. So maybe both mentioned can
be seen as empowering agents. 

I will not point out 'bad' or 'good', just offer my 2 cents-though some
believe my mental currency is not even worth that. I post this message
foremost for myself. And so it goes, objectionable views in a devalued
world. 
 
-I-



On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 14:06 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:14:57AM -0400, Marc Lanctot wrote:
> > Has it occurred to you that maybe [most] women just aren't as interested  
> > in the subject matter as men? Sure, it's intimidating that CS is fully  
> > of geeky men (even for some men!).. do you really think you can make the  
> > generalization that women avoid it because of people within are socially  
> > inept?
> 
> Yes it has, and research has been done apparently (my wife would be able
> to provide links I am sure) that show that it isn't the subject matter
> that is the problem.  So yes I really do think that is a fair
> generalization.
> 
> If you look throughout history at various types of jobs, it has often
> been the case that initially when something is new and cutting edge,
> only men do it.  When it starts to become mainstream and more routine
> and no longer "cool" for the "cowboys" to be doing it, you get a lot
> more women involved.  So there is hope for CS some day.  It just has to
> become normal enough that the "jocks" no longer want to do it and move
> onto something else.  At some point doctors were pretty much only male.
> These days that is far from the case.  At one point teachers were almost
> all male (although I guess in some places the studens were all male too
> in some cases).
> 
> As long as girls are brought up being told "be careful" and "be gentle"
> and boys are encouraged to explore and have excitement, we are going
> to have issues with genders in certain fields if they require a certain
> attitude to survive.  CS is unfortunately to a large extent one of those
> environments where people are very competitive and pushy.  That doesn't
> suit people who have always been told to be nice and gentle.  Hopefully
> that will change.  In fact I hope both the environment and the upbringing
> of both genders can be brought in order.
> 
> > I've been through CS and had female friends that have been through it as  
> > well as some through engineering. What I can say is sometimes it was  
> > pretty awkward for them, yes.. and I wouldn't have wanted to be in their  
> > position at times. But please don't imply that this environment would  
> > stop them from following their career.
> 
> At some point a lot of people will decide that the environment is too
> hostile to be worth it no matter how much the field interests you.
> 
> > I'm with Dave and Peter on this one; even after their requests to end  
> > this nonsense people are still following up the thread with juvenile  
> > follow-up jokes. There was a lot of this at the last meeting.. so much  
> > that it took Colin about two times what it would normally take anybody  
> > to give that talk. I was quite amazed.
> 
> Oh dear.  I have read comments about meetings in the past, although I
> have never made it to one.  Sounds like one of the less good days.
> 
> > I'm not without a sense of humor either; I appreciate and contribute my  
> > fair share of geek humor when it's appropriate .. but there are 600 or  
> > so people on this list, most of whom I'm sure would rather talk about  
> > Linux-related subjects than exchange geeky jokes.
> >
> > So can we please bury this?
> 
> It will die out soon.
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/legacy/attachments/20090325/32d19c99/attachment.html>