Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!topaz!uwvax!husc6!harvard!cmcl2!philabs!linus!encore!mikes From: mikes@encore.UUCP ( Mike Skrzypczak) Newsgroups: net.women,net.sci Subject: Re: Why are there so few [female|black] physicists? Message-ID: <328@encore.UUCP> Date: Thu, 31-Jul-86 14:16:25 EDT Article-I.D.: encore.328 Posted: Thu Jul 31 14:16:25 1986 Date-Received: Sat, 2-Aug-86 09:04:15 EDT References: <4368@decwrl.DEC.COM> <719@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU> <326@encore.UUCP> <770@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU> Reply-To: mikes@encore.UUCP ( Mike Skrzypczak) Organization: Encore Computer, Marlboro MA Lines: 70 Xref: watmath net.women:11792 net.sci:1425 In article <770@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU> cheryl@batcomputer.UUCP (cheryl) writes: >>Cheryl: >> Why did you find it important to drive people out of AP Chemistry? > >We just wanted to see if we could do it. Certain men had tried exactly the >same tactics on us when it came to taking the top-tracked math courses and >AP Chem. They made our job pretty easy for us. When they came around >telling us *not* to take AP Chem, we just agreed with them that they were >perfectly right, and then told them that they shouldn't take it either if >they felt that way. It was more a case of holding up a mirror to the game >they had started, rather than starting up a game of our own making. > You ought to explain these things in the beginning as they actually happened, instead of saying "we forced them out". Its sounds like in the original posting [did I miss some important background information/posting that might have clarified this] that you actively forced men out for just the sake of it. Here it looks like they really convinced themselves not to take it. >> I honestly do not understand what the advantage of making >> the AP Chem class mostly women was. > >The advantage to us was not having to suffer the male-vs.-female >game-playing that goes on in such a course. It was either us or them. >We decided that we would rather have it be us. What male-female game playing are you talking about? Could you please expand on the academic atmosphere there? Why was it "us or them"? I would like to know how you come to your conclusions. > >Politics ain't pretty, but it's the >way things work. We proved that. Why should we have to put up >with people in the course who don't *really* want to be there? I >mean, if they *really* wanted to be there, they wouldn't have let >us talk them out of it so easily. > True, politics are not pretty. Politics are generally not fair or equal. I am glad you recognize that the world works this way. Now you won't bitch when you end up on the short end of the stick, since this is the way the world is ;-). > >> I also do not understand >> why one of the males dropped the course just because you said >> it was easy and worked your buttocks off at the problem sets. > >Actually, he was the one who started complaining about how hard the work >was, perhaps making a feeble attempt at baiting us into feeling similarly >overworked. I caught one woman giving into it, and promptly winked at >her and said "Nah, it's not *that* hard. Just takes a little concentration >and perseverance, right Sue?" Then she realized that it was the *effort* >she was complaining about, not the difficulty of the problem set. The >guy, being of weaker character continued to blame the difficulty of the >problem sets, and dropped out. We merely took advantage of his weakness. > "Took advantage of his weakness". I thought taking advantage of people was not a good thing to do. Oh yeah, this is politics.I guess its ok then ;-). >> Why is a person who stays in AP Chemistry a martyr and a masochist? >> Is it just because you tried to force him out the class? > >Yeah, probably, but I decided to call him a martyr and a masochist -- >because that's what women are called when they devote themselves to >a course of study. Just trying to illustrate a point. > Who calls women martyrs and masochists? Please support this statement. What point are you trying to illustrate? Awaiting your reply... Michael Skrzypczak