Comments on: Donate to the Ada Initiative, support women in free/open culture, get a snazzy Ada Lovelace pendant http://boingboing.net/2011/12/13/donate-to-the-ada-initiative.html Brain candy for Happy Mutants Thu, 20 Jun 2013 09:09:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: John Smith http://boingboing.net/2011/12/13/donate-to-the-ada-initiative.html#comment-1295448 John Smith Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=134040#comment-1295448 I'm glad you weren't too intimidated to reply to this. I am. I’m glad you weren’t too intimidated to reply to this. I am.

]]> By: nmjk http://boingboing.net/2011/12/13/donate-to-the-ada-initiative.html#comment-1295257 nmjk Tue, 13 Dec 2011 20:57:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=134040#comment-1295257 @Craig R Meyer You're right that "most" women have little interest in these subjects, but then, statistically, "most" men also have less interest in these subjects, because there are a host of other occupations that are occupied by women and men alike. The audiences that these sorts of initiatives are encouraging are those who *are* interested but are readily excluded from the efforts due to (whether deliberate or inadvertent) discrimination, abuse, and the multitudinous "default" ways of interacting that implicitly advantage male-typical behaviour because that's the prototype around which the field was generated. The reasons cited in my preceding paragraph all harbour vast amounts of debate, vitriolic disagreement, evidence, and counter-evidence, and are all worthy of addressing on their own. I don't intend to defend or pursue any question of whether they exist or don't, are relevant or not, etc. I use them only to posit that there are existing obstacles for women who *are* interested in the STEM fields, and that that is the reason the initiatives you object to exist. We're not forcing girls who would rather be psychologists, or nurses, or teachers, (or whatever) into STEM. We're encouraging the girls whose preferences are already STEM. @Craig R Meyer
You’re right that “most” women have little interest in these subjects, but then, statistically, “most” men also have less interest in these subjects, because there are a host of other occupations that are occupied by women and men alike.

The audiences that these sorts of initiatives are encouraging are those who *are* interested but are readily excluded from the efforts due to (whether deliberate or inadvertent) discrimination, abuse, and the multitudinous “default” ways of interacting that implicitly advantage male-typical behaviour because that’s the prototype around which the field was generated.

The reasons cited in my preceding paragraph all harbour vast amounts of debate, vitriolic disagreement, evidence, and counter-evidence, and are all worthy of addressing on their own. I don’t intend to defend or pursue any question of whether they exist or don’t, are relevant or not, etc. I use them only to posit that there are existing obstacles for women who *are* interested in the STEM fields, and that that is the reason the initiatives you object to exist.

We’re not forcing girls who would rather be psychologists, or nurses, or teachers, (or whatever) into STEM. We’re encouraging the girls whose preferences are already STEM.

]]> By: E T http://boingboing.net/2011/12/13/donate-to-the-ada-initiative.html#comment-1295245 E T Tue, 13 Dec 2011 20:45:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=134040#comment-1295245 "Wikipedia has 9% women editors... " donate and get a pendant or become an editor? “Wikipedia has 9% women editors… ” donate and get a pendant or become an editor?

]]>