set $Linux=Gnu/Liunx# I don't want another flame war on trivialities;)
Hello Guys $ Gals,
Well, I normally do not participate in such discussions, maybe I am a
bit shy or maybe I don't care.
But seriously instead of banging your heads with each other and making
a really good atmosphere vitia
At 2005-08-24 12:29:51 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Instead of taking potshots at me, could you actually list out such
> "disrespectful" behaviour on the mailing list which causes such a
> less number of women to participate online?
Certainly. There have been several instances of such behav
> (Oh, and please disabuse yourself of the notion that only women are put
> off by crass behaviour. There do exist men who don't think respectful
> behaviour is "special treatment.")
Okay... brings me back to the point - other than making fun of them
when they specifically ask for special treatmen
> again for you kind information kindly go to
> http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Encourage-Women-Linux-HOWTO/
Been there... read that. Not at all informative. The regular
run-of-the-mill stuff!
> >I haven't been to recent meets... so I can't comment on the women
> >unfriendly atmosphere there.
> >
> So
At 2005-08-24 11:33:08 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Men & women have differences which should be resepected. Move on.
"Move on" is exactly what women are doing, and they don't seem any worse
for it. Remember that we're having this discussion because someone asked
specifically why women don'
Saurabh Nanda wrote:
>>1. If you reall want a woman in here f**king stop treating them like woman
>>and treat them like other human beings.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>2. If Women really think this is helping please look back, it only makes
>>us think you want special treatment
>>
>>
>
>THE most sen
On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 11:33, Saurabh Nanda wrote:
>
> Rant stops here... go back to work and be more productive.
>
> Nandz.
Just proves people aren't actually reading the HOW TO. This mail, and
the one it is responding to (Manpreet's) would be enough to keep women
off the list- now I fully unde
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> "Manpreet" == Manpreet Singh Nehra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Manpreet> Would You guys just drop this f**king thread.
Manpreet> [snip]
Hey, if you don't like it don't read it! all people can't be
interested in all things, and it's pre
> 1. If you reall want a woman in here f**king stop treating them like woman
> and treat them like other human beings.
> 2. If Women really think this is helping please look back, it only makes
> us think you want special treatment
THE most sensible post on the thread!
Stop asking for 'special t
On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 10:58, Raj Mathur wrote:
>
> Hassath> Also, how about adding a link to the HOW TO ENCOURAGE
> Hassath> WOMEN IN LINUX which I sent in my earlier posting? At
> Hassath> least that might indicate to members that the list has at
> Hassath> least thought about ma
> "Hassath" == hassath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hassath> [snip]
Hassath> Indeed, if I felt that I would be treated as just another
Hassath> human being with an interest in FLOSS, I would feel
Hassath> encouraged- I (or any other woman) would dislike being
Hassath> look
Manpreet Singh Nehra wrote:
>Would You guys just drop this f**king thread.
>
>
>
I guess we should drop you and your nonsense from this thread. I am not
sure what the guidelines are but my guess and vote is that you are
beyond limits
>If you guys really think this discussion is doing anything
Would You guys just drop this f**king thread.
If you guys really think this discussion is doing anything useful then you
should check the time spent on reading this s**t. Get some life ppl.
1. If you reall want a woman in here f**king stop treating them like woman
and treat them like other human b
On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 09:47, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> > Suggestions about what to do next:
> No, I think it's imperative that people stop associating the idea of
> encouraging women to participate with yet-another-talk about "how to
> encourage women to participate".
>
> I think we should try
At 2005-08-22 10:30:29 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Suggestions about what to do next:
>
> a) The talk idea was good - In fact, it needn't be one person coming
> down to talk on Gender issues on public mailing lists and/or take in
> perspective of the greater socio/political aspect.
After
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>Neither am I a student of sociology or culture, and nor do I have the
>>necessary knowledge to "dwell" at this point of time thus, I will not
>>dwell into the nature of society at large. It is a big question and many
>>have spent their entire life on the quest which still
On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 14:13, Prashant Verma wrote:
> Dear Abhijit and Hassath,
>
> I wanted to say that Nitin may have a point there.
> Nitin has mentioned that what he intended to say is
> not what you understood from his email.
Hi Prashant,
I am actually quite tired of all this- like i mentio
Dear Abhijit and Hassath,
I wanted to say that Nitin may have a point there.
Nitin has mentioned that what he intended to say is
not what you understood from his email. Now, we know
that language has its limitations and words are prone
to misinterpretation, reinterpretation ...whatever
(there you
On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 11:50, Nitin Chandra wrote:
>
> I cant begin to comprehend the limited vision with
> which the context of my statment is understood. :)
> Well if this is the way individuals have an
> understanding, so be it...I Accept their level of
> understanding.
>
> No more "social cau
At 2005-08-22 23:20:30 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> No more "social cause" statments from me. :)
Excellent. Thank you for your cooperation.
-- ams
___
ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilug
> 3. Perhaps I don't need to respond to the remark
> about women having to
> accept men as they are- it has been responded to.
> But I just want to
> make the point that it is the kind of remark that is
> enough to make a
> woman want to withdraw from the list. No woman is
> obliged to accept any
At 2005-08-22 10:30:29 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> One thing which we can very clearly disregard is the possibility
> that the list is not interested.
Right.
Enough people are interested in solving the problem that rehashing the
argument will just give the disinclined more rope to waste e
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 15:55, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
> On Monday, 22 Aug 2005 2:32 pm, Raj Mathur wrote:
> Actually Raj, now that I have re-read it, I agree with Hassath that it is
> *potentially* offensive to women. While it might be perceived as humorous to
> men, it appears condescending t
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 16:10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> But it always helps to have the "other" around. In fact the more others
> the better it will get I hope
>
> ram
>
Thanks Ram. At any rate, I am not interested in exchanging insults and
accusations.(It's not a woman's way, honestly ;-))
Greetings,
Hassath wrote:
> Like i said, I brought up the issue cos
> i thought the list
> was actually interested in changes. If it isn't,
> then sorry- I take my
> hands off.
One thing which we can very clearly disregard is the
possibility that the list is not interested. I'm sure
this discuss
At 2005-08-22 03:54:17 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Well I HAVE BEEN CATCALLED N WISTLED BY GROUP OF WOMEN UNKNOWN TO ME
OH MY GOD! THOSE SHAMELESS HUSSIES!
How *dare* they complain about oppression or exclusion?!
> Women just need to jump in and get the language "barrier" resolved
> duri
Just one quibble in isolation:
At 2005-08-22 15:33:13 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Sigh. See how difficult being politically correct all the time is?
Sandeep, it's not about being politically correct. At all. Ever.
Everyone thinks political correctness is ridiculous, including women,
disa
At 2005-08-22 14:32:26 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Perhaps people who have had prior experience with gender issues can
> come forth and give inputs, or be blunt and specific when some line
> is crossed.
Blunt and specific. OK, I can do that. :-)
> At the moment we're all sitting around ag
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> "Ram" == ramnarayan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ram> [snip]
Ram> Again why somebody with experience - why make someone else
Ram> responsible for the clean up - is this clean up going to be
Ram> restricted to the list - thats o
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 15:33, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
> On Monday, 22 Aug 2005 1:19 pm, hassath wrote:
> Hassath, let us discuss this without getting bitter. I understand the
> frustation, and I do agree with AMS that atmosphere in the LUG meets is
> something that will make women (or children
--- "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> >
> >Nitin Chandra wrote:
> >
> >--if i may add the fourth option
> >
> >where by women can accept men as they are and STILL
> >come forward and make a difference rather than "be
> in
> >the stand and comment".
> >
>
> Well thats the stand
On Monday, 22 Aug 2005 3:56 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Sandip this bitterness - which you see - is not being able to get an
> important issue across. Check out the number of typical male mails
As I said, I understand the reason behind the bitterness, but being bitter
never helps in having a g
At 2005-08-22 02:48:17 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> where by women can accept men as they are and STILL come forward
> and make a difference rather than "be in the stand and comment".
Which nicely removes all responsibility from you, and allows you to say,
with a straight face, that the pro
>
> Hassath
>
>
>On the other hand, perhaps they need to hear more of the "other"
>perspective...
>
>Regards,
>
>
But it always helps to have the "other" around. In fact the more others
the better it will get I hope
ram
>___
>ilugd mailinglist --
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 15:40, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >
>
> Well thats the standard arguement " accept us as we are ".
> So one is not expected to change for the better.
>
>
> men are abusive so let them be - accept them as they are
> men can harass women - accept that
> men can use crude
Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
>Hassath, let us discuss this without getting bitter. I understand the
>frustation, and I do agree with AMS that atmosphere in the LUG meets is
>something that will make women (or children or any elderly people)
>uncomfortable.
>
>
>
Sandip this bitterness - which
On Monday, 22 Aug 2005 2:32 pm, Raj Mathur wrote:
>
> Fair enough. The attempt at humour was supposed to achieve the
> reverse of what you are reading it as, but that doesn't make a
> difference in this context.
Actually Raj, now that I have re-read it, I agree with Hassath that it is
*potential
hassath wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 12:25, Pankaj kaushal wrote:
> If there is a result-less discussion, maybe you could take more
> responsibility for it- you too are part of this list. What a typically
> privileged attitude -" Oh, nothing comes out of these discussions!" If
> you saw it as bei
>
>
>Nitin Chandra wrote:
>
>--if i may add the fourth option
>
>where by women can accept men as they are and STILL
>come forward and make a difference rather than "be in
>the stand and comment".
>
Well thats the standard arguement " accept us as we are ".
So one is not expected to change for th
On Monday, 22 Aug 2005 1:19 pm, hassath wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 12:25, Pankaj kaushal wrote:
> > I am neither discomforted by the discussion nor am I complacent, merely
> > un-interested in discussions without a result.
>
> If there is a result-less discussion, maybe you could take more
> re
>
> Fair enough. The attempt at humour was supposed to
> achieve the
> reverse of what you are reading it as, but that
> doesn't make a
> difference in this context.
>
> As I see it, we have two options open to us:
>
> - - Everyone introspect and figure out ways of doing
> things right so
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> "Hassath" == hassath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hassath> [snip]
Hassath> Thanks ams- i agree with all your points. I want to add
Hassath> another one, which i have mentioned in my response to
Hassath> Pankaj- the freedel blog
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 12:07, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> At 2005-08-19 13:32:33 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > the prevailing atmosphere???
>
> Right. I can answer that question better now, mostly by having studied
> the responses in this thread. Let's have a look, shall we?
>
> 1. Denia
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 12:25, Pankaj kaushal wrote:
>
> I am neither discomforted by the discussion nor am I complacent, merely
> un-interested in discussions without a result.
If there is a result-less discussion, maybe you could take more
responsibility for it- you too are part of this list. Wh
hassath wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 22:45, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> And Pankaj, this thread repeatedly will raise "its ugly head" because
> this issue has not been resolved. I am not sorry that it causes
> discomfort in your complacent world.
I am neither discomforted by the discussion nor a
At 2005-08-19 13:32:33 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> the prevailing atmosphere???
Right. I can answer that question better now, mostly by having studied
the responses in this thread. Let's have a look, shall we?
1. Denial. "What's wrong with the atmosphere, dammit?"
2. Proof-by-anecdote th
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 22:45, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> At 2005-08-19 17:17:31 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > In all my experiences, I haven't encountered any sexism towards
> > females in areas related to computing. Not even bad jokes.
>
> I wonder if that's because you (and other people
[snip]
> >
> > But yes, I have been on this list for a few months, and have not
> > heard anyone actually mention it as a loss- the fact that there
> > are no 'active' women on the list.
>
> I don't know what you were expecting to see, but the subject does come
> up every now and then: people wond
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> "ams" == Abhijit Menon-Sen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
ams> Hi. At 2005-08-19 16:08:43 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ams> wrote:
>> But yes, I have been on this list for a few months, and have
>> not heard anyone actually mention it
Greetings,
ams said -
>
> Appropriate behaviour is not learned in a vacuum:
> it's learned through
> repeated interaction and observation. Very few
> people actually *want*
> to make women uncomfortable, but if they don't get
> any feedback about
> what they're doing wrong, they won't know what t
Hi
Just to bring in another perspective. I work for an NGO -that works with
rural communities and natural resource governance. One our main concerns
and areas of work are to involve women in the various aspects of life
that have normally been male bastions. Governance mechanims, involvement
i
At 2005-08-19 14:00:56 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > the prevailing atmosphere is likely to discourage women [...]
>
> And which prevailing atmosphere is this?
There's only one of 'em.
But it's really difficult to express in words just why I think it's
likely to discourage women (and, to
Hi.
At 2005-08-19 16:08:43 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> But yes, I have been on this list for a few months, and have not
> heard anyone actually mention it as a loss- the fact that there
> are no 'active' women on the list.
I don't know what you were expecting to see, but the subject does
Greetings,
Hmm.. a simple query seems to have stirred up a
hornets nest - and maybe for the better. But that
remains to be seen I guess.
Apart from other issues which I think I'll probably
devote another email to..
--- Abhijit Menon-Sen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
the prevailing
> atmosphere i
Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> would claim to be anti-women, but I've often felt that the prevailing
> atmosphere is likely to discourage women from ever visiting more than
the prevailing atmosphere???
- prateek
___
ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-
At 2005-08-19 17:17:31 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In all my experiences, I haven't encountered any sexism towards
> females in areas related to computing. Not even bad jokes.
I wonder if that's because you (and other people) misjudge what might
actually make women uncomfortable. I'm sure
> Take it further and ask- if there are few women, why is it so? And if
> there are a substantial number, why they don't post. And the answer is
> NOT that there are not enough bright women interested in GNU/Linux.
> This is too serious a question to be mentioned as an aside...
>
> And yes, in c
hassath wrote:
> mention it as a loss- the fact that there are no 'active' women on the
> list. So I want to know if you guys have ever at any point felt the need
> for a gender equitable representation on the list? If yes, what steps
> have you taken to find out the reasons- and try to make it con
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 12:54, Raj Mathur wrote:
>
> OK, so in your opinion why are there so few women? Is it an innate
> issue with perceived geekiness? Or something specific to this list
> (or User Group) that keeps them distant? Or do we need to perform
> some specific tasks or activities tha
> "Hassath" == hassath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hassath> [snip]
Hassath> Take it further and ask- if there are few women, why is
Hassath> it so? And if there are a substantial number, why they
Hassath> don't post. And the answer is NOT that there are not
Hassath> enoug
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 08:16, Viksit Gaur wrote:
> Hullo,
>
> I was wondering, in reference to Raj's commment..
> >
> > Hi D00dz and D00d3tt3z,
> >
> How many dood3tt3z are actually on this list? :)
>
> Cheers,
> Viksit
>
>
> --
> Viksit Gaur
Take it further and ask- if there are
Hullo,
I was wondering, in reference to Raj's commment..
>
> Hi D00dz and D00d3tt3z,
>
How many dood3tt3z are actually on this list? :)
Cheers,
Viksit
--
Viksit Gaur
me[at]viksit[dot]com
viksit[at]linux-delhi[dot]org
http://viksit.com
Just because you have a mind like a hammer do
62 matches
Mail list logo
