 |
 |
Robin ++. MJ - I can't barely respond to you. This is rather upsetting because the very group of people that want and need and are willing to gather to create such an initiative are being told no. I don't think a group that offers support and learning focused toward a marginalized membership base is discrimination. There are many women in tech groups and they exist for a reason and work well. People can't learn if they don't feel comfortable and safe. If people wonder why women feel intimidated and not part of things- it's this attitude right here. How sad. On 12/13/12 2:09 PM, "Robin Schaaf" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >MJ, when you put everything under Equality, it dilutes each individual >purpose. I find this type of response aggravating, actually (and enough >that I'm actually sending an email (which I never do) about this!) >Women have different issues than other groups - even stuff like when you >have a kid and take a year off, how do you keep up on your mad >programming skillz? Or program with pregnancy-brain? >We often have different ways to look at things - obviously not less, but >different. But in a predominantly male field it's easy to get lost or >feel like an outsider (or heck, to be assumed in marketing!) > >If you want to be inclusive, you need to have a supportive environment. >It's probably hard for anyone to imagine themselves a part of community >when being outnumbered 20 to 1, especially with responses that dismiss >something that multiple women are interested in. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of >MJ Ray >Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 7:26 AM >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Question abt the code4libwomen idea > >> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Bess Sadler <[log in to unmask]> >>wrote: >> > There have been some contradictory statements made about >> > #libtechwomen because it was an emerging idea, and like code4lib, >> > there is no formal power structure or authority. There is no >> > requirement that one be female to participate, [...] > >That is good to know and a big improvement. > >> > The suggestion has been made that the name "libtechwomen" might not >> > be welcoming to someone who wants to participate but does not >> > identify as a woman. We have already discussed changing it and >> > welcome suggestions. > >I suggest libtechEquality - any progress with other suggestions? > >Cary Gordon <[log in to unmask]> >> Are there folks out there who think that you can only be in one IRC >> room at a time? If I want to be in the #190cmtall room, nobody in >> #code4lib would know, nor would it be any of their business. Are there >> people here who really feel threatened by this? > >That's not really a similar thing, but might indicate other problems. >Would we not be troubled by code4lib<anything>, just because it could be >kept hidden and you could use code4lib anyway? > >Regards, >-- >MJ Ray >Setchey, Norfolk, England