9234dwz@houxf.UUCP (The Rev. Peak) (08/15/85)
Following Karlas observations of net.womens content I took a look
myself, I was somewhat surprised to see that some of what she said
followed traditional statastical models ( some truth some BS ).
114 articles
73 by men
35 by women
6 unidentifiable
So there are twice as many articles from men as from women.
Then I took things a step further because Karlas bone of
contention was that the news group was being *dominated*
by men. I then deleted all references to the authors name
in the articles submitted by men and examined them for
content. I divided the contents into 4 categories,
a) seemingly supportive of feminine issues and concerns
b) seemingly unsupportive of feminine issues and concerns
c) fence sitters
d) what the hell is this doing in net.women ?
a) = 29
b) = 9
c) = 25
d) = 10
Category c is probably the most suspect one as a rabid anti-feminist
would put more of c in a whilst a rabid feminst would place more of
the c in b.
But to me, whilst there is a 2 - 1 majority of articles by male authors
I can't see how the group is being *dominated* by males ( the most
prolific authors were both females [7 articles and 5 articles]).
In fact it looks to me that although there are more male authors, most
are supportive, some could be more supportive with further prodding
( not too hard lest a backlash occur). I would hope that this would
be construed as good news, that change is occurring.
Dave Peak
@ ihnp4!hotel!dxp
"All the net's a stage and all the men and women merely ham actors !"
- Rev Peak (apologies to Bill S.)
PS - I agree with Karla that some of the stuff is REAL tedious folks