Re: debian and women? from DWN #10
Monique Y. Herman wrote:
I just saw this in Debian Weekly News issue ten:
<http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/debian-vote-200403/msg00067.html>
I guess I just wonder.
I've never found any sort of hostility or difficulty in dealing with any
technically-oriented online forum; if anything, I've found that some
people seem to go out of their way to respond to women.
Sometimes I've seen them lining up to help you. I get a good laugh out
of it.
Okay, I lie. I've had hostility from a couple of individuals, but I've
*never* attributed it to my female-ness, and in most cases there was
evidence to suggest that they were equal-opportunity flamethrowers =)
In one case I've seen, there was. I got the sense that there was a touch
of mysogynism involved. But that's people, If we were all the same,
where would individuality exist?
Any women out there? Have you found debian and/or other OSS or
technical groups to be difficult, possibly because you're female?
Any guys have opinions?
She seems to be talking about a fear of being put down or treated poorly
for participating in a technical forum. This isn't a fear I've ever
had, but maybe I'm in the minority? I've also heard of women
masquerading as men online to avoid any such questions ... and I've had
women tell me that, in MMORPG type situations, groups tend to follow
their direction much better when they played a male character. Me, I
never cared for playing male characters, so I haven't had a chance to
test that theory.
The only reason that I have ever come across to explain somebodys'
masquerading as someone other than who or what they are, is the fact
that they believed that they themselves, were insufficient to the
occasion. When you think about it, this is a somewhat sad personal
statement to make.
Just kind of wondering what others think about this. I don't find
debian off-putting, but then, I use vim, so maybe my interpretation of
"userfriendly" is a bit unconventional. I think her suggestion that the
community be aware that the poster may be nervous in the first place is
a good point, regardless of their gender, but putting "woman-friendly!"
on the website would be a bit odd -- although certainly more welcome
than that ridiculous "designed by women" printer (with handle!) or the
"made for women" car with the welded hood ...
Once I was looking after a pub in the middle of Australia (I was the
bouncer), in a mining town called Mount Isa. In those days it was pretty
wild. Serbians and Croatians knifing each other, Russians, Ukrainians,
and Georgians having their squabbles, arabs and jews, 'Blacks' and
'Whites', rednecks and militant hippies (this type had M1s and M16s to
keep the rednecks at bay, who liked to ride their horses round their
bush shacks at night shooting through them), and all the rest that comes
from throwing fifty-two different nationalities into one town together,
with a somewhat small and insufficient law enforcement aspect.
Anyway, a friend, Fanny, came to visit after she and another woman had
ridden their horses around the entire coastline of Australia. She made
her own way in that bar, she didn't come across as tough, she was petite
and feminine (she died of cancer some years ago, now), she knew her
horses, and could speak on equal terms with any jackeroo, station-hand
or breaker there. Partially because of what she knew, but predominantly
because in the course of gaining that knowledge, she had established the
fact within herself, to her own satisfaction, of her own equality, and
so never thought to consider herself as less than that. And because she
didn't accept that she was less than equal, nobody else did either, I
didn't have to step in once and there were some hard boys in that bar.
Resect from others is engendered from self respect. If you don't respect
yourself, you don't give anybody else the opportunity to do so either.
Why don't you think about that, and then read that post again, so you
can understand why there are so many lonely men in the world.
Sorry for the rambling ...
You obviously thought it was important enough to post.
Regards,
David.
Reply to: