Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!usc!jarthur!ucivax!gateway From: celit!daemon@ucsd.EDU Newsgroups: soc.feminism Subject: Re: Electronic Communications anResources for women Message-ID: <13852@celit.fps.com> Date: 15 Dec 90 01:34:46 GMT References: <1990Dec11.042632.28846@ariel.unm.edu> Reply-To: Patricia Shanahan Organization: FPS Computing Inc., San Diego CA Lines: 32 Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu Nntp-Posting-Host: zola.ics.uci.edu In article <1990Dec11.042632.28846@ariel.unm.edu> kevins%cie.uucp@ariel.unm.edu (Kevin Smolkowski) writes: > > I have a couple of friends who are interested in researching what is >available in terms of electronic communcations and information sharing >for women. > >They are considering setting up a Bulletin Board system and/or the >purchase of a machine that could form the basis of a net accessable >information resource geared toward women's issues. There is an assumption in this that really bothers me. In my view, the whole of USENET, with the possible exception of soc.men, is "available electronic communications and information sharing for women", just as much as it is for men. I don't magically stop being a woman when I am reading about computer architecture, or benchmarks, or Unix. The assumption is that such resources are only "for women" when they are being used to discuss "women's issues". Unless you consider every issue that any woman cares about to be a "women's issue", this is just not true. This is a very one-dimensional view of women, treating us as invisible when we are concerning ourselves with the subjects that interest us as unique individuals, unless those subject are "women's issues". Why do people make this assumption? -- Patricia Shanahan ps@fps.com uucp : ucsd!celerity!ps phone: (619) 271-9940