Women and TLUG - a personal rant

[CLIFFORD ILKAY]

On 01/15/2014 10:12 PM, Randy Jonasz wrote:
> On 14-01-15 09:55 PM, Colin McGregor wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 9:15 PM, William Park <opengeometry-FFYn/CNdgSA at public.gmane.org
>> <mailto:opengeometry-FFYn/CNdgSA at public.gmane.org>> wrote:
>>
>>     On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 08:39:26PM -0500, Scott Elcomb wrote:
>>     > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 7:53 PM, William Park
>>     <opengeometry-FFYn/CNdgSA at public.gmane.org <mailto:opengeometry-FFYn/CNdgSA at public.gmane.org>> wrote:
>>     > > Come on, guys.  This bitching about TLUG meeting is strange
>>     to me and
>>     > > counter productive as group.  People come to the meeting
>>     because they
>>     > > want to learning something, and people don't come to the
>>     meeting because
>>     > > they have nothing to learn.
>>     >
>>     > People come for other reasons as well. They also come for the
>>     > community - I hate not making it out more often than I do.
>>     >
>>     > > Heckling and harassment are side issues.
>>     >
>>     > On the contrary, people are talking about why they no longer
>>     > participate in person.  If community is the heart of GTALUG then
>>     > meetings should be the lifeblood.  Such topics should not be
>>     dismissed
>>     > out of hand.
>>
>>     What I mean is, they no longer participate because they see no
>>     need to
>>     come to the meeting (e.g. Linux distros are easy to install, tons of
>>     info on Web, etc.), and not because there is heckling.  That is, they
>>     are acting in their own self interest.
>>
>>     For example, if SAP were to present at TLUG and give free samples of
>>     their software, I'd bet women would be more than happy to come in
>>     garter
>>     belt and sucking on their favourite dildos.  I would attend, too,
>>     only
>>     because I normally have to pay to see that.
>>
>>
>> William,
>>
>> Sigh, the above sort of comment is part of the problem, not part of
>> the solution...
>>
>>
>> Colin.
>
> I must admit William's comment took me by surprise and shocked me. 
> But in a free society where free speech is lauded and exported beyond
> our borders I must disagree with the condemnations.  Are we to censor
> ourselves so only anodine speech is acceptable?  Free speech involves
> the freedom to be offended.  If William wishes to represent himself as
> someone who objectifies women as sexual objects so be it.  Although he
> has my condolences.  Poor taste and a lack of judgement is no excuse
> for censorship.

Randy, please refer to GSF#1 in the article Colin posted. While anyone
is free to make a fool of themselves, others are free to hold them to
account and condemn their behaviour. Comments like the ones made by
William only serve to add insult to the original injury.

-- 
Regards,

Clifford Ilkay

647-778-8696

Dinamis

<http://dinamis.com>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/legacy/attachments/20140115/da77983f/attachment.html>