Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mcnc!ecsvax!jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV From: tan@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Greer Hsing Tan) Newsgroups: comp.society.women Subject: Re: Women competing with men Message-ID: <7012@ecsvax.UUCP> Date: 15 May 89 22:05:24 GMT References: <6962@ecsvax.UUCP> Sender: skyler@ecsvax.UUCP Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA. Lines: 93 Approved: skyler@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Moderator -- Trish Roberts) Comments-to: comp-women-request@cs.purdue.edu Submissions-to: comp-women@cs.purdue.edu In article <6962@ecsvax.UUCP> moe!jeremy@ppgbms (Jeremy Levine) writes: >>>Sender: skyler@ecsvax.UUCP >>>In the 13th April 1989 edition of "Computing", there is an interview >>>with Cally Ware, a product manager with the systems house Hoskyns. >>>An excerpt:- >>> >>>"What advice would she give to young women determined to make the most >>>of a career in ... computing? >>>"'Enjoy being a woman and don't compete with men on their own terms.'" >>>Would readers agree or disagree? > >I happen to be a male, but I love to read the news so I thought I might >reply to this posting. > >I think it's trash, "... own terms .." what is this ?? I like to think that >computer science is an open field. I feel that from the start CS had >good ( yes, NOT great ) opportunities for women. How can we forget >Ada Lovelace ( the first software engineer ), Grace Hopper and a slew >of University Faculty members. The competition between people in the >field of computing is totally ( at least should be ) intellectual. > Yes. I agree that the competition between people in the field of computing should be totally intellectual, but there are social pressures against women in computing, engineering and sciences. The brilliant women that you mention were not only smart, but they were also strong and knew how to play the game right ... namely, the men's game. God created man and woman to be different (whether you believe in God or not, you *have* to believe in the difference in male and female biologically as well as chemical make-up.) ... and the complications of society and environment, we've gotten a lot of biological stuff mixed upwith behavior which inevitably has an affect on the concept of ability. As it turns out, man had the head start and took over the world of business, industry and thinking in general. He tailored the world to himself. The problem with playing catch-up is that the temptation is to follow in the leaders footsteps. I think what Cathy Ware was trying to say was that women have to realize that what we really ought to do is to build our own road. We can get to the same places, build an equivalent and compatible business world, that is tailored to us. One need not shun her femininity to become a businessman, but rather glory in her womanhood and thus succeed. I'm not saying that men and women are so incredibly different, but there are subtle differences in the way corporate america is run today that favor the success of a man, and sometimes works to the disadvantage of a woman. Why not? It's been created and run by men since the beginning? Is it not human for men to have taken advantage whenever and whereever he could? How was he to know what tailorings were to the fact he was human and what tailorings were to the fact he was a man? Now woman comes along after being forbidden from this territory for so long and discovers, yes ... there is a certain amount of humanness here ... but there is also a certain amount of 'male' that she need not accomodate and can replace with her 'female' to achieve the same result. >One of the most fantastically knowledgeable teachers I ever had >was a women and a rather young women. As I understand it Sun Micro- >systems is hiring more and more women. Which I think is a good >move. We aren't arguing about women's capability. Your examples all prove that women can be brilliant computer scientists ... so why aren't there more women in the field? In engineering? In corporate america with managment/executive positions? The ratio doesn't even come close to the population ratio of women to men. That is the whole point! With the equivalent capaiblities, how does a woman and a man achieve the same goals? And the answer is, she does it like a woman, and he does it like a man. If she tries to do it like a man, which has been the common accepted way so far, she has to work a lot harder and she is less likely to succeed (thus there are so few ... currently). > >while I was in school I was part of the student software support team >for 2 vax 785's 2 vax 750's 1 sperry 7000/40 and about 50 sun workstations. >All of these systems were under the control of one very intelligent >female. > >I say compete, beat and take over the field for all I care .... I just >want to work with the best .......... > >Jeremy Levine - Amarex Technology Inc.- UNIX UNIx UNix Unix unix..... > Things are changing, and Cathy Ware is just trying to point out where women are succeeding and achieving equivalence and how. I believe that a woman can be a woman, with all her feminine virtues and assets, and work side by side with other men and women. That she *must* be the woman that she is inorder to succeed ... because she will be that much more at ease with herself, and that much more self confident of herself. Greer