I was similarly taken aback by her apparent dismissal of feminism. For most of her post, she outlined the subtle institutional sexism that enables her would-be rapist and prevents her from taking any effective action.
Does she believe that by giving credence to the feminism that challenges the less overt sexist attitudes and actions in the community, we divert attention from 'real' violence towards women? Perhaps she's aware of the fact that many dismiss feminism categorically, so she's attempting to distinguish the violence towards her as a real offense.
Either way I agree with you, but I also can't blame her for writing it the way she did. I hope that the incredible guts it took for her to write this post encourages other women to be vocal about their own experiences of this nature. I hope this gently open a dialogue on sexism with an undeniable and overt demonstration of sexism in the community. But right now, I hope that the community supports her.
You neglect the way that boys are given toys and video games that facilitate their interests in technical and scientific fields. You neglect the clear precedence and majority of boys who are studying CS. You neglect the clear lack of female role models in the industry. All of these things are strikes against making the hypothetical 17 year old choose this field. These factors alone make the playing field not level, let alone the numerous other social factors that a young girl encounters.
You have to take into account that these perceived fundamental differences are increasingly challenged in studies today, and it's becoming increasingly accepted that most of these differences are social.
As culture becomes more homogenous, the differences are becoming less evident. I'm don't think people are proposing an extreme "plugging ears" situation, but a "hey let's push them a little further and see what they can do" often with astounding success. I think this mostly depends if you view the impacts of women on the technical fields so far as positive or negative. I personally believe they have had a positive impact (look at my other posts) so I am more inclined to push women past their societal boundaries, hopefully not past their 'fundamental female' boundaries.
I am in the same situation as I'm a studying mathematician, but I think she neglects to acknowledge the (extreme) politics of the scientific fields that necessitates a diversity of viewpoints. I know far more people who have issues with that.
I do complain about not enough male nurses, where the gender difference is noticeable and is affecting the direction of the field or perceptions of the field itself.
Yes, there should be some room for "gender differences" which is not necessarily distinguishable anyway--however, there are actually compelling reasons for women and men to join fields that they are minorities in.
In this case, it is not that women merely choose not to go into technical fields out of pure disinterest. It is the social barriers and the lack of exposure women have had since childhood. This comic briefly explains: http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1883
Women have the possibility of increasing the total popularity of the field and decreasing the social stigma behind technological fields. They increase the total size and productivity of the industry. They increase the diversity of perspectives in the field. They appeal better to and understand female clients. They could make technological fields more presentable and appealing.
This technological feminism helps women as well. There are increasing spaces for Computer Science-related jobs in the industry and there is not an equally strong work force rising to meet it. Making it more appealing and more acceptable for women to take these roles (there would have to be a disproportionate push towards women because of their given backgrounds) would give them a wider range of profitable options in life and would increase the accessibility of the technological culture to all women. I believe that the 'geek' culture surrounding the growth of technology is becoming a more important and significant part of mainstream culture, yet women are not participating in it as widely as men are. The implications for the culture and the women not participating it are not great.
I realize the group here is not as receptive to technological feminism, being primarily male and anti-feminist, so I will stop here. Please feel free to message me if you are interested.
I'm interested in the implications of this talk. It appears that women have to be practically coddled into joining the open source crowd. Are the barriers really that significant? Are women really that sensitive?
Given the choice, I'd probably take the Rosetta Stone.
If I'm actually supposed to use it (instead of say, becoming independently wealthy by selling it), I think I'd prefer the iPad despite the convincing implication that it has equal utility to a stone tablet.
Actually wait, I'll have to think about it. Who needs a touch screen if you have multitasking?
Does she believe that by giving credence to the feminism that challenges the less overt sexist attitudes and actions in the community, we divert attention from 'real' violence towards women? Perhaps she's aware of the fact that many dismiss feminism categorically, so she's attempting to distinguish the violence towards her as a real offense.
Either way I agree with you, but I also can't blame her for writing it the way she did. I hope that the incredible guts it took for her to write this post encourages other women to be vocal about their own experiences of this nature. I hope this gently open a dialogue on sexism with an undeniable and overt demonstration of sexism in the community. But right now, I hope that the community supports her.