moiram@tektronix.UUCP (Moira Mallison ) (10/23/84)
I recently received a complimentary copy of the bimonthly newsletter for the above organization. I would like to hear about other people's experiences with it before making a decision whether or not to join. Thanks, Moira Mallison tektronix!moiram
apratt@iuvax.UUCP (10/27/84)
Is this kind of organization appropriate? I am reminded of the old saying, "When women try to act like human beings, they're accused of acting like men." But when women say, "We're not the Association for Human Beings in Computing, we're the Association for WOMEN in Computing," isn't that counterproductive? ---- -- Allan Pratt ...ihnp4!inuxc!iuvax!apratt
miller@nlm-mcs.ARPA (Nancy Miller) (10/27/84)
I attended one meeting of this group, in McLean, Virginia, last spring. My impression is that they are oriented towards business-related, versus research-related computing. Possibly local AWC groups in other locations are different. Many of the members met for dinner at a restaurant near the location of the lecture and meeting. Their newsletter listed a coulple other activities, too. I'd be interested to hear whether others' experiences are different. Nancy Miller (miller@nlm-mcs.arpa)
ecl@hocsj.UUCP (10/28/84)
Reference: <3953@tektroni.UUCP>, <9200017@iuvax.UUCP> I for one am against this sort of organization--can someone out there convince me that this isn't an example of another futile attempt at "separate but equal"? I don't want women's professional organizations that parallel men's--I want one organization for everyone. Women's groups would sue the asses off any company that started a separate "women's division" where they hired all the women. And they certainly couldn't (and shouldn't be allowed to) start a "women-only" company. Aren't many of the supporters of these "Women in Computing" groups the same ones who are suing the Jaycees et al to force them to admit women? (And how would people feel about an organization called "the Association for Jews in Computing" or "the Association for the Handicapped in Computing"?) It may be true that "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" but the important word here is "foolish," folks. Far too many advocacy groups ignore all logic and consistency in their positions. If women don't want their gender to be considered in the workplace, they should start by not making an issue of it themselves. Evelyn C. Leeper ...ihnp4!hocsj!ecl
apratt@iuvax.UUCP (10/29/84)
> (And how would people feel about an organization called "the Association for > Jews in Computing" or "the Association for the Handicapped in Computing"?) > > Evelyn C. Leeper > ...ihnp4!hocsj!ecl ...what about "the Association for Men in Computing"? ---- -- Allan Pratt ...ihnp4!inuxc!iuvax!apratt
saquigley@watmath.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (10/29/84)
>(And how would people feel about an organization called "the Association for >Jews in Computing" or "the Association for the Handicapped in Computing"?) > >It may be true that "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" >but the important word here is "foolish," folks. Far too many advocacy groups >ignore all logic and consistency in their positions. If women don't want their >gender to be considered in the workplace, they should start by not making an >issue of it themselves. > > > Evelyn C. Leeper > ...ihnp4!hocsj!ecl > > Yes, but there might be problems about being a woman in computing that are ignored by men, and will only be brought up by women getting together to fight them. One such problem that was pointed out by a union of mostly women members is the affect of VDTs on the fetuses of pregnant women. Men and women are different physiologically and as long as men are at the control of most professional organisations, and regard "women's problems" as second- class problems to worry about when votes are needed, women will need special interest groups to do stronger lobbying for their concerns. For the same reasons, an association such as "the association of disabled people in computing" would also probably be very valuable. Sophie Quigley ...!{clyde,ihnp4,decvax}!watmath!saquigley
chabot@amber.DEC (L S Chabot) (10/29/84)
AWC? AWSE? SWE? Counter-productive? (no, actually I imagine they are very productive for their members) How come Nobody complains about the BPOE or the Moose or Masons? Hey, I like to drink as much as the next Engineer, and I can remember any number of secret signs. Oh, they're grand fraternal orders? So? I'm a sibling of Epsilon Theta Fraternity, and a *man* of Alpha Phi Omega and remain a member and am familiar with the secrets of the Ancient and Honorable Order of the I D-D (which has a very memorable handshake). L S Chabot UUCP: ...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-amber!chabot ARPA: ...chabot%amber.DEC@decwrl.ARPA USFail: DEC, MR03-1/K20, 2 Iron Way, Marlborough, MA 01752 shadow: [ISSN 0018-9235 v21 #10 p81, bottom vt100, col3, next to next to last]
features@ihuxf.UUCP (M.A. Zeszutko) (10/31/84)
Evelyn Leeper says that she does not like the idea of women's professional organizations that parallel men's; she'd prefer one organization for everyone. She also brings up the thought that the people who are suing the Jaycees would probably be the same people who would support the women-only organizations. I would like to bring up a parallel here: The National Organiztion for Women (NOW) is often thought of as "The National Organization *of* Women". Actually, NOW accepts men as members. Perhaps these professional women's groups would accept men as members, too, with the *focus* remaining on the professional women. Mary Ann Zeszutko ihnp4!ihuxf!features
ecl@hocsj.UUCP (10/31/84)
Reference: <194@hocsj.UUCP>, <9625@watmath.UUCP> Sophie Quigley says: > Yes, but there might be problems about being a woman in computing that are > ignored by men, and will only be brought up by women getting together to > fight them. One such problem that was pointed out by a union of mostly women > members is the affect of VDTs on the fetuses of pregnant women. But then shouldn't we have the "Association for Pregnant Women in Computing"? :-) Rather we should have whomever is concerned about an issue lobby within the larger group, since that is where the real change can be effected. Women who want the Republican Party to change its platform have to deal with the entire party. Forming "the Association for Women Republicans" won't do it. and Allan Pratt says: > ...what about "the Association for Men in Computing"? Precisely!!!! (After all, men must be concerned about the effect--note spelling--of VDT's on their fertility, but of course women wouldn't be, so let's start a separate group. :-) ) Evelyn C. Leeper ...ihnp4!hocsj!ecl
dls@hocse.UUCP (10/31/84)
CC: skran Reference: <194@hocsj.UUCP>, <9625@watmath.UUCP> There is no doubt that organizing a special interest group can aid members of minority groups. However, I believe that ecl has a somewhat different point. There is a big difference between a "woman's caucus" in the ACM that works to change the ACM and a "woman's computer society" that is totally separate. Until women become integrated into the REAL power structure true equality will not exist. Hence, women must join and be active in the ACM, the jaycees, etc., not substitute women only groups that have no real power. In fact, the energy expended on maintained a duplicative organization is counterproductive. Dale
greenber@acf4.UUCP (10/31/84)
<> I assume the same assoc. exists for Men?? If not, aren't you folks being a little sexist?? I belong to about five different groups that in some form or another revolve around computers. They aren't sexist --- or I wouldn't belong. I assume that the equalitarians amoung you refuse to join any group as blatantly sexist as ACW?? Back in college I tried to start a number of groups as a protest: Proposed Group To Ridicule ================== ================ Heterosexual Student Union Gay Student Union White Student Union Black Student Union Agnostics Club Jewish Club Men Student Union Womens Student Union Now I know "We've been deprived for so long and we have special needs, so we deserve our own group". BULL! If you want equality, START NOW. You should just as hotly protest any group dedicated to the advancement of any one "class" or "type" of people as you would one you considered to be prejudical to your own favorite group, class, or type. Back to college: A number of very large members of the ***** Student Union visited me one evening and convinced me that I should drop this thing, since funding from the Student Activity Fund was split on a group-by-group basis based on _potential_ membership, and they were upset by the thought that their particular group would lose funding. They were A LOT bigger than me!! Ross M. Greenberg @ NYU ----> allegra!cmcl2!acf4!greenber <----
tron@fluke.UUCP (Peter Barbee) (10/31/84)
Excuse me for being uninformed, is there an effect on fetuses from a VDT? How close do you have to be? Does changing (or varying) the output wavelength help? In the dark, Peter Barbee decvax-+-uw-beaver-+ ihnp4--+ allegra-+ ucbvax----lbl-csam-+--fluke!tron sun-+ ssc-vax-+
moiram@tektronix.UUCP (Moira Mallison ) (11/02/84)
I've gotten no responses from anyone involved with this organization, but a few requests for the address, so here it is. A word of warning: it took about 3 months to get a response from them when I wrote. Association for Women in Computing 407 Hillmoor Drive Silver Spring, MD 20901 Moira Mallison tektronix!moiram
crs@lanl.ARPA (11/02/84)
> > Is this kind of organization appropriate? I am reminded of the old saying, > "When women try to act like human beings, they're accused of acting like men." > But when women say, "We're not the Association for Human Beings in Computing, > we're the Association for WOMEN in Computing," isn't that > counterproductive? > ---- > -- Allan Pratt > ...ihnp4!inuxc!iuvax!apratt I ask this out of honest interest in the answer -- no sarcasm or other offences are intended. There has been some discussion recently about the Association for Women in Computing. There are several things I am curious about. 1. Are the existing professional societies/associations discriminating against women? In what way? 2. Is it not possible to accomplish the desired aims in the existing societies/associations? What are the aims that are addressed by the Association for Women in Computing that are not (adequately) addressed by existing associations? 3. Is the Association for Women in Computing a so called support group (as net.women.only was intended to be) as opposed to a professional society in the normal sense of the word? Charlie Sorsby ...!lanl-a!crs crs@lanl experiment: Cc: crs
falcone@erlang.DEC (Joe Falcone, HLO2-3/N03, dtn 225-6059) (11/02/84)
CC: 1. There are various "Special Interest Groups" within and outside of various professional organizations (e.g., ACM SIGCAPH [Computers and the Physically Handicapped] - produces their newsletter in print and cassette editions). These groups provide a real service as a forum for people talk about solutions to age-old problems of discrimination and integration, which don't go away just because the government says they have (a la "There is no hunger in America" - HA!) I think it would be great for the ACM to have a SIG for women and minorities in computing - perhaps we should all write our ACM reps. "...as long as men are at the control of most professional organisations..." - watmath!saquigley 2. I'm only speaking for the Computing field as the IEEE does have a REAL problem wrt women, but the ACM does have many women in leadership posts including: President, Adele Goldberg Member-at-large, Evelyn A. Swan Editor TOPLAS, Susan L. Graham Editor TOCS, Anita K. Jones Editor CR/GTCL, Jean E. Sammet as well as 2 or 3 of the regional reps and at least one member on every significant committee in the ACM So I would dispute the claim that women have no influence in computer professional organizations. As President of ACM, Adele Goldberg has an opportunity to use the ACM's publications to influence industry attitudes toward women (and other minorities) in the high tech workplace, where IEEE and other surveys have indicated that there is tough going. RE: Computer Terminals and your Health As an occasional user of a Xerox Star workstation, I can attest to the numerous problems it has caused me and other people in our facility (dizzy spells, nausea, headaches, eye strain). Whoever did the human factors on their keyboard and display should have been employed by the Spanish inquisition - it is equally bad for men and women. Although there is probably negligible radiation danger, the stress produced by using the Star is probably not good for a pregnant woman. To combat these problems, we took the extraordinary measure of installing a special lighting system just for the Star area. Joe Falcone Eastern Research Laboratory decwrl! Digital Equipment Corporation decvax!deccra!jrf Hudson, Massachusetts tardis!
gail@calmasd.UUCP (Gail B. Hanrahan) (11/02/84)
Perhaps the Association for Women in Computing was formed for
much the same reasons as net.women.only?
Gail Bayley Hanrahan
{ihnp4,decvax,ucbvax}!sdcsvax!calmasd!gail
Calma Company, San Diegosrm@nsc.UUCP (Richard Mateosian) (11/03/84)
> > (And how would people feel about an organization called "the Association for > > Jews in Computing" or "the Association for the Handicapped in Computing"?) > > ...what about "the Association for Men in Computing"? > What about the Association for Computing Machinery? :-) -- Richard Mateosian {amd,decwrl,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4}!nsc!srm nsc!srm@decwrl.ARPA
chabot@amber.DEC (L S Chabot) (11/06/84)
From _Kiss_Sleeping_Beauty_Good-Bye_ (subtitled Breaking the Spell of Feminine Myths and Models) by Madonna Kolbenschlag, Bantam Books, copyright 1979, ISBN 0-553-14912-1 [p. 45]: "By contrast, women are not so comfortable in groups--chiefly because it confirms and accentuates their identity as females, a class excluded from the dominant caste in our society. In part, these feelings are introjections of a traditional male paranoia about women in groups. Aristophanes treated the projection humorously in _Lysistrata_. Early American conduct manuals cautioned men against allowing their wives to associate too much with their female peers, lest the "neighborhood squadrons of she-commanders" might encroach on their "natural sovereignty" as husbands. Others with less of a sense of irony or righteousness have treated the problem with sadistic vengeance in purging "witches" and other harbingers of female energy. In a typical business office today, a bevy of secretaires excites no notice. But half a dozen women junior executives having lunch together is likely to conjure up "conspiracy" in the minds of many men. Likewise, on a university campus, if one sees a group of men together it does not penetrate the consciousness at all. Nor does a group of female undergraduates. But a group of women faculty: How the comments do fly! How the plots do multiply! "What is happening, of course, is that a dominant caste is reacting to a threat to their established sway. ... "Women can be forgiven for their instinctive uneasiness in all-female groups. Unless they are somewhat isolated from the real world (as with convents and girls' schools), they are bound to experience negative projections from the surrounding social texture. ..." Quoted without permission. ----------- L S Chabot UUCP: ...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-amber!chabot ARPA: ...chabot%amber.DEC@decwrl.ARPA USFail: DEC, MR03-1/K20, 2 Iron Way, Marlborough, MA 01752 shadow: [ISSN 0018-9162 v17 #10 p7, bottom vt100, col3, next to next to last]
chabot@amber.DEC (L S Chabot) (11/06/84)
acf4!greenber == > > Proposed Group To Ridicule > ================== ================ > Heterosexual Student Union Gay Student Union > White Student Union Black Student Union > Agnostics Club Jewish Club > Men Student Union Womens Student Union > > Now I know "We've been deprived for so long and we have special needs, so > we deserve our own group". BULL! If you want equality, START NOW. You > should just as hotly protest any group dedicated to the advancement of any > one "class" or "type" of people as you would one you considered to be > prejudical to your own favorite group, class, or type. Of course, it never crossed your cute little mind that these groups were organized for purposes other than "the advancement of any 'one' class or 'type'". What about this idea--they're organized as a forum to discuss common interests. Gee, what would the Jewish Club discuss? Why can't they just join Campus Crusade for Christ? Or what would the Gay Student Union ever have to talk about? (and where I went to school, such an organization didn't restrict it's membership--what are they going to do, demand proof?) And, of course, equality is here, so there's no discrimination, so there's absolutely no need for gays, blacks, jews, or women to want to gather and possibly discuss any discrimination they may have experienced. Obviously they're all nuts, and should instead be attending group therapy to adjust themselves to "reality". Was similar action taken against any clubs organized around hobbies, say: Proposed Group To Ridicule ================== ================ "fans are fools" club science fiction club two left feet club dance club local chapter of the flat earth IEEE or ACM student chapters society go fish club bridge club chess-board-upheaval society chess club stay inside and watch tv club mountaineering club tone-deaf club music society model kangaroo-court club model railroad club Society for Creative SCA Contemporaneousness After all, who do these people think they are, organizing themselves with directions to discussing things in which **I** have absolutely no interest (not being genetically/societally/by-choice a railroad afficionado)! They'd do better to integrate themselves into "normal" society, and forget about their individual differences. I just *love* it when people expose their prejudices in the net! L S Chabot UUCP: ...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-amber!chabot ARPA: ...chabot%amber.DEC@decwrl.ARPA USFail: DEC, MR03-1/K20, 2 Iron Way, Marlborough, MA 01752 shadow: [ISSN 0018-9162 v17 #10 p7, bottom vt100, col3, next to next to last]
greenber@acf4.UUCP (11/07/84)
decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-amber!chabot says: > Of course, it never crossed your cute little mind that these groups were > organized for purposes other than "the advancement of any 'one' class or > 'type'". What about this idea--they're organized as a forum to discuss common > interests. I'll never admit my mind is cute.... They might be formed to discuss common interests. But are you now stating that all these groups, including AWC (or whatever) might have interests that are separate and distinct from the rest of our population? If that is the case, then I have no problem with clubs that are set up to advance the interests of one group over the other: the Ku Klux Klan comes to mind immediately. Why these good 'ole boys have common interests --- and they happen to include jews and blacks and others, too. In fact their "Klub's" is primary concern is about jews and blacks and others! I'm sure that they get into some really interesting discussions, too. Not in THEIR best interests, though. > Gee, what would the Jewish Club discuss? Or what would the Gay Student Union > ever have to talk about? For the most part Jewish and gay stuff, I suppose. That's to be expected from a biased group. And I have no problem accepting them as a biased group, asking for and receiving special privledge. Just don't go yelling about how "we're discriminated against" when just by having a club that fosters this "separate but equal" crap you yourself are discriminating. Do women have special interests regarding computers? Careful! If the answer is no, then why have a special club?? If the answer is yes, then you certainly should expect to be treated differently, since you are proclaiming that there is something different. > (and where I went to school, such an organization didn't restrict > it's membership--what are they going to do, demand proof?) It would certainly make the initiatian ceremony more interesting!! I joined many of the groups I outlined in my past article. I found them to be formed for one reason: to promote the special interests of a particular group. This was coming from my "tax" (student fund) dollar, and *I* was not to benifit. Sorry. I just can't cope with the idea of people asking me to donate to their worthy cause, and then telling me that *I'm* part of the problem. > And, of course, equality is here, so there's no discrimination, so there's > absolutely no need for gays, blacks, jews, or women to want to gather and > possibly discuss any discrimination they may have experienced. Obviously > they're all nuts, and should instead be attending group therapy to adjust > themselves to "reality". No, equality is not here. Yet. And there are problems with all of our so-called minority groups. Being a member of two of them, I have my desire for equality, too. But sitting in circles and beating on a big drum didn't do much then, and still isn't. Talking about problems within the group that is having that problem is a little mastabatory (does such a word really exist? If so, did I spell it right?), don't you think. The sad part of these special interest groups is that you neglect to solve the problem outside of the group. If there must be AWC, then there must be a problem with another group that just doesn't seem to listen to the needs of women. So instead of trying to change that group, you splinter off into a separate group?? Doesn't make much sense, and doesn't appear (to me, at least) to really be facing a problem. CRTs cause radiation damage to fetuses? Quick, lets run to our group and talk about how horrid this situation is. Psssst! We'll pass a resolution about how awful it is, and then what??? If there is a problem to humankind, lets all work on it together, not in these ridiculous little groups that spring up. > Was similar action taken against any clubs organized around hobbies? Nope. Not unless they were trying to make some statement that was really a political view. You see I sorta feel that hobby groups that organize around any given interest (like, say, computers) are inherently non-biased and non-sexist, unlike sexist/baised groups like, say, AWC. > After all, who do these people think they are, organizing themselves with > directions to discussing things in which **I** have absolutely no interest > (not being genetically/societally/by-choice a railroad afficionado)! They'd > do better to integrate themselves into "normal" society, and forget about > their individual differences. No, you'd be better off trying to integrate yourself into a society that really shouldn't have groups that are formed to advance one group over another. If instead you feel you must join such groups, then don't complain when a group forms that is designed specifically to advance everyone elses interests EXCEPT YOURS. And you contradict yourself again: There really are "individual differences" or class differences? If they are individual, then you will join clubs that only have you for a member (how does that Woody Alan/ Groucho Marx joke go?), and then really don't have a need to exist. If there are class differences, than you have already given up the right for equality, since you have already said: "We are different, and expect to be treated as different." If you say that, it doesn't mean that you'll be treated better, just different. Different pay scales, career paths, etc. Don't complain: you have your club to complain to, right? You'll be sure to pass a resolution at the next scheduled meeting, or will you call a special meeting? > I just *love* it when people expose their prejudices in the net! Alas, I just hate it. I really pray for equality one day soon. If nothing else, it will reduce net traffic. Double sigh. Ross M. Greenberg @ NYU ----> allegra!cmcl2!acf4!greenber <----
ariels@orca.UUCP (Ariel Shattan) (11/07/84)
It's Association FOR Women in Computing, not Association OF Women in
Computing. That means that ANYBODY can join, not just women.
It's also Society FOR Women Engineers
National Organization FOR Women
If you don't look after your own interests, who will?
Ariel ("If I am not for myself, who am I?
If I am only for myself, what am I?
And if not now, when?" ) Shattan
..!tektronix!orca!arielsken@ihuxq.UUCP (ken perlow) (11/18/84)
-- [Ross Greenberg, responding to Lisa Chabot on special interest clubs] >> No, equality is not here. Yet. And there are problems with all of our >> so-called minority groups. Being a member of two of them, I have my >> desire for equality, too. But sitting in circles and beating on a big >> drum didn't do much then, and still isn't. Talking about problems >> within the group that is having that problem is a little mastabatory >> (does such a word really exist? If so, did I spell it right?), don't >> you think... Your desire for equality, indeed. Like me, technically a minority, but hardly oppressed. Wait until anti-Semitism comes back with a vengeance--you'll be beating a drum quicker than you can say "Meir Kahane." The effectiveness of a group, of a cause, depends on tactics. Sitting in circles may not do much, but sitting in buses and restaurants did. (Incidentally, Ross, there is such a word as "masturbatory"; no, you didn't spell it right.) >> No, you'd be better off trying to integrate yourself into a society that >> really shouldn't have groups that are formed to advance one group over >> another. If instead you feel you must join such groups, then don't >> complain when a group forms that is designed specifically to advance >> everyone elses interests EXCEPT YOURS. And you contradict yourself >> again: There really are "individual differences" or class differences? >> If they are individual, then you will join clubs that only have you for >> a member (how does that Woody Alan/ Groucho Marx joke go?), and then >> really don't have a need to exist. If there are class differences, than >> you have already given up the right for equality, since you have already >> said: "We are different, and expect to be treated as different." >> If you say that, it doesn't mean that you'll be treated better, just >> different. Different pay scales, career paths, etc. Don't complain: >> you have your club to complain to, right? You'll be sure to pass a >> resolution at the next scheduled meeting, or will you call a special >> meeting? Welcome to the 20th Century, Ross. If we were all tolerant of the rights of others, perhaps we could all work together on into the promised land. Unfortunately, most minorities do need to band together just to be heard. And in an uncertain economy, such rumblings are often interpreted by the folks in power as "If they get more, I'll get less." Recognizing class differences does not mean giving up the right to equality; it simply means acknowledging that the equality does not exist. Expect to get treated different? "So-called" minority? Sure, ask the Black family that was run out of a white neighborhood on the west side of Chicago this past week--with gasoline bombs. -- *** *** JE MAINTIENDRAI ***** ***** ****** ****** 12 Nov 84 [22 Brumaire An CXCIII] ken perlow ***** ***** (312)979-7188 ** ** ** ** ..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken *** ***
greenber@acf4.UUCP (11/23/84)
<> Now, ken, do you really expect me to take a case like the aforementioned black family and their horrific circumstances and compare that to Association of Women in Computers?? Isn't that streching it a bit?? First, in the case of the black family, they were subject to extraordinary prejudice that resulted in a threat to their lives and AWC just doesn't rank with that! Second, the black family was subjected to something that was not in their control. AWC is creating this situation from scratch. Any problems that might have been resolved in the general public (some group that doesn't (officially or unofficially) cater to one sex or the other) by the potential members of AWC is being removed from the general public in a "our interests are not your interests" kind of Mexican standoff. I just don't see it. And as to the idea of sitting in circles or sitting in the back of buses? The persons who refused to sit in the back of the buses were making an active statement. They had a legitimate gripe, and they worked to rectify it. Their courage allows for the potential membership of AWC to come foward within a non-sexist group and to state their LEGIMATE gripes and to seek redress. The people that sat in the back of the buses were making a public statement as well. What will AWC do when they are confronted by a case of sexist prejudice?? Well, if they do not stay a part of the mainstream, not much. And again: if you state you are different, then you deserve to be treated differently. And differently does not mean better. It just means differently! Ross M. Greenberg @ NYU ----> allegra!cmcl2!acf4!greenber <----
moiram@tektronix.UUCP (Moira Mallison ) (11/26/84)
>AWC is creating this situation from scratch. Any problems >that might have been resolved in the general public (some group that >doesn't (officially or unofficially) cater to one sex or the other) by >the potential members of AWC is being removed from the general public >in a "our interests are not your interests" kind of Mexican standoff. OK, I've been sitting here for about a month now reading garbage like this, and the temperature has been rising, but I've kept it under control.... until now. I posted the request for information (in the form of experiences with AWC) which got this discussion started. I received two replies, both asking for the addresses I have. I heard NOTHING about what this organi- zation really does. So how can you folks have an intelligent discussion about whether or not an organization has a right to exist, or is discrimina- tory, or whatever, based on so little information. I recently read "Barriers to Equality in Academia: Women in Computer Science at MIT", a report prepared by female graduate students and research staff in the Laboratory for Computer Science and the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at MIT (thanks to Joy Hoppe for the pointer). While the report is specific to MIT, it can be generalized (in my experience) to include not only other academic situations, but industrial situations. If an organization, such as AWC, exists to support women in combatting not only the overt discrimination, but the pervasive subtle discrimination, then it not only is appropriate, but it is necessary. (Note that I'm not saying this is what AWC is about. I STILL don't know. Any followup from the folks I gave the addresses to? There isn't a local chapter here in Portland). Moira Mallison tektronix!moiram