Archive for the ‘Zuska, Zuska, Zuska!’ Category

Tim Berners-Lee calls for end to “stupid” male geek culture

Monday, October 8th, 2007

From a ZDNet.co.uk article by Tom Espiner (via our friend Rohit):

The inventor of the world wide web, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, has called for an end to the “stupid” male geek culture that disregards the work of capable female engineers, and puts others off entering the profession.

Berners-Lee said that a culture that avoided alienating women would attract more female programmers, which could lead to greater harmony of systems design. “If there were more women involved we could move towards interoperability. We have to change at every level,” he said.

According to Berners-Lee, a culture exists where women can be put off a career in technology both by “stupid” behaviour by some male “geeks”, and by the reactions of other women.

“It’s a complex problem — we find bias against women by women. There are bits of male geek culture and engineer culture that are stupid. They should realise that they could be alienating people who are smarter and better engineers,” said Berners-Lee.

Engineering research facilities that interview candidates based only on how many papers they have had published also risk adding to the problem, according to Berners-Lee, because of an apparent in-built bias against women.

One academic went through a sex change, submitted the same papers under both identities, and found that papers were accepted from a man but were rejected when they came from a woman, said the web inventor. This bias is unaccountable, but adds to institutional bias, he said.

Joy of Science begins over at Thus Spake Zuska

Monday, February 12th, 2007

She’s Such a Geek! contributor Suzanne Franks is starting her course “Feminist Theory and the Joy of Science over at her blog, Thus Spake Zuska. Today she posted her synopses of the first week’s readings as well as some other notes, all of which is open for discussion in the comments.

All of this is well worth reading, especially if you’ve ever thought that not fitting in with the dominant culture in a technical field reflected some flaw in you. (It took me a long time to forgive myself for my failing to fit in in physics, but now I know that I’d been brainwashed to be a science worshiper.) Remember, science is not perfect; it has a culture, too, and like all cultures, it has its flaws.

Here’s a taste of what Zuska writes here about women in engineering (WIE) programs, whose value is being debated since women still make up less than 20% of engineering majors, even after nearly thirty years of programs encouraging women to go into these careers:

So are WIE programs a waste of time and resources? I don’t think so, for the following reasons. If a college of engineering is going to do little or nothing to change business as usual, then a WIE program provides a safe haven for the women who do manage to slog it out in the Boy’s Club. They need a place to go once in awhile to get advice on moron management, you know. WIE programs can help reinforce the belief that it’s not abnormal for a woman to love technology. They can also help women see that one need not be completely obsessed with technology to be a “real” engineer. In this case, WIE programs are truly there just to help women deal with the status quo….

I’ve always said that women don’t need programs to help them deal with engineering; they are perfectly capable of doing engineering. Engineering needs programs to help it become more inclusive.

Cheesecake calendars are so cliche

Saturday, February 10th, 2007

So over at Rants of a feminist engineer I just read about a “Girls of Engineering” cheesecake calendar depicting several women enrolled in the engineering school at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Supposedly the makers of the calendar wanted to convey the notion that women in engineering don’t just study all the time.

Well, no duh. We know that women in engineering, and female geeks of all stripes, don’t just geek out all the time. People all have their needs for love, intimacy, and sex, regardless of what they choose to do for a career.

But I also don’t think that posing in lingerie in front of a camera is the best way to communicate the message that women can be multidimensional. Instead, it just replaces the stereotype of the geeky woman with the stereotype of the woman who is there for men’s sexual pleasure. I doubt that anyone who buys this calendar is going to be reading the information on the women’s majors. That’s probably written in much smaller print than those images of skin and lingerie splashed across the page.

Hey, I’m sure the modeling sessions were fun, and it’s people’s right to pose for a cheesecake calendar if they want to. But aren’t “tongue-in-cheek” pin-up calendars way overdone, anyway? And if people really want to see how female geekery and sex mix, the written word can put a far more nuanced point on the matter anyway—as SSAG contributors Violet Blue, Suzanne Franks, and Quinn Norton do in their essays!

UPDATE: Zuska just wrote about this calendar, too—and reminded me that there have been others like it just within the past year. People, how about a different calendar that tries to show how original and creative y’all can be, for a change? This pinup stuff really is sooooo boring on top of all the other things wrong with it!

A People’s History of Science

Saturday, February 3rd, 2007

So I’m all excited that SSAG’s Zuska is going to be leading a virtual course on her blog titled “The Joy of Science,” which will teaching about science from a feminist perspective. I’ve picked up some of the books on her reading list from the library and requested the ones not available here through interlibrary loan. (Hey, books aren’t cheap, and I’m very picky about where I put my cash. I like to try them out first before committing to a purchase, the way my husband downloads MP3s and then buys the CDs of the ones that he likes, directly from the band or the small label if at all possible.)

As it happens, I’d already been reading a book titled A People’s History of Science by Clifford D. Conner. Since I’ve been reading Zuska’s blog I’ve become much more aware of how little I knew about the culture of science when I was in it, and that my notion of it being this pure world where the Truth was the main object was horribly misguided. (I’ll admit, at the same it wasn’t like I was totally pure in what I wanted from science: a good career, a place where I would be validated for what I felt at the time to be my chief talents, an intellectual playground.)

(more…)

I’m a dittohead for Zuska

Monday, January 29th, 2007

SSAG contributor Suzanne Franks just cranks out one thought-provoking post after another over at her blog Thus Spake Zuska. Just about everything she writes about there is relevant to what our book and blog are about, too, so I’ve created the new category Zuska, Zuska, Zuska! to include the many links in which I anticipate I will be namechecking or quoting from her or responding to something that she wrote. We need to get a blogroll going here, too, but I think that might have to go on another page, since the menu on the right-hand side of the screen has quite a bit of information already.

Anyway, go read Zuska’s analysis of how people should have handled the incredibly rude situation when a male professor from the Stone Age snubbed a female academic. In a nutshell: if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.

Geeks, sex, gender, and physics

Saturday, January 20th, 2007

I’d like to point y’all to a posting about She’s Such a Geek and the ensuing discussion over on SSAG contributor Suzanne Franks’ blog, Thus Spake Zuska. Suzanne, aka Zuska, wrote about someone who asked her for suggestions for books about women in science. Zuska suggested a couple of books, including SSAG, but the person responded that they didn’t feel our book was appropriate to put into high school libraries.

Zuska suspects that the “inappropriateness” of the book is due the fact that several essays have to do with sexuality and the female geek and perhaps some frank language. And she goes on to argue that you can’t have an honest discussion about women and science without acknowledging these issues. Here’s an excerpt of what Zuska writes:

A “role model” book for young girls has to address sex and sexuality. It has to show what it’s like to deal with the vast majority of boys who are intimidated by smart women; what it’s like to deal with the ever-present comments on your sexuality in the workplace; what it’s like to discover your sexuality within and because of your geekhood. I think these are the kinds of true life stories that can help girls, as much as or more so than one more nicely varnished volume about the handful of women who’ve won the Nobel Prize.

Writing about the intimate and personal lives of women geeks, and putting that writing into the hands of young girls, is a political act with the possibility for great reverberation. So it’s no wonder some people are going to be reluctant to find such writing “appropriate”.

Of course, you should read her complete entry.

Zuska is right that the truth isn’t very easy or welcome, because it can be a threat to the status quo. She’s talking here about the discussions of sex in the book, but I also think it’s important to talk about how science and technology careers are sold to girls as well. The thing is, the thinking seems to be that to inspire girls to keep up with science and technology, you have to keep it relentlessly positive, talking about how many opportunities they have and how great it is to be someone who’s succeeded in one of these fields. And it’s true—girls really do have lots of opportunities in the scientific and technical fields if they stick with it, and many women do succeed there. Inspiration most definitely comes from having good things to aspire to.

But not every female science/technology career thrives, and for a variety of reasons that can be very different from why men leave. It could be said, with apologies to Tolstoy, that happy careers are all alike, but every unhappy career experiences its own set of obstacles and setbacks. And I think that we shouldn’t sugarcoat the very real issues that a girl could face in her future if she’s considering going into some of the tougher technical careers.

(more…)