miller@mcs.nlm.nih.gov (Nancy Miller) (07/14/88)
G>Article 107 of comp.society.women: G>From: @hamlet.bitnet:tan@devvax.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Greer H. Tan) G>Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA. G> G>pretty good expert in UNIX, and I always wondered why I couldn't derive G>as much pleasure in finding out the little intricacies of the system like G>some of my male counterparts ... I really thought it was just me. I mean, G> G>boyfriend on the other hand would have loved to do nothing more ... My sister G>describes herself as virtual memory. She doesn't actually know everything, G>but she knows how to get to it ... where as most men *are* disc memory ... G>they actually *know* the stuff off the top of their heads! G> G>to every generalization ... but, for the most part women tend to notice G>details and think about the finer points of life and men tend to see the G>bigger picture in a much more less complicated sort of way. G> G>Greer You start out by saying that men sweat the details and women don't, at least not when it comes to computers. Then you end by saying that women sweat the details, but men don't, in any area. A blatant contradiction. Doing some sort of study to compare men's vs. women's styles of cognition does sound interesting, the best explanatiion for the differences in the way we perform in different areas that I have seen is still the socialization process wherein males are expected to be more involved in certain areas and women are expected to be more involved in others. By the way, I managed to convince my parents to get me an erector set, also (as someone else posted). I liked that bettter than playing with dolls. I never got the "robot" toy I wanted, though, because my Aunt thought that, of course :-( , my brother was the one who wanted it. Nancy Miller miller@mcs.nlm.nih.gov
skyler@violet.berkeley.edu (07/30/88)
The same friend also writes:
An odd thing for me, though, is not understanding the
gender mix that some people encounter. Everywhere that I have worked, there
was a high proportion of women in the technical staff -- or at least it seemed
so to me -- if not in technical management. And of course the first wizards
in the U.S. were women -- the Eniac was basically operated by Navy women in
the pictures I've seen. That is where Grace Hopper and Betty Holberton got
their starts, and I have had the pleasure of working with other women who
started in the early days of Univac.
In my life as a consultant, about a year ago I did a study in an organization
where *all* project leaders with line responsibilities were women. The one
exception was the Data Base Administrator, who was a male peer of the project
leaders. The manager was a man and he was grooming his two most senior project
leaders to be his backups and replacements. (Whether that happens will depend
more on the attitude of the management line above him, I expect.)
I'm inclined to think that the usual wizard profile is still pretty masculine,
of course.
By the way, it was Grace Hopper who first pointed out to me that computing at
home was a nifty activity for women with newborns and infants. This was back
before PCs, but she pointed out that groups of women had banded together in
the Boston area to do part-time programming work in order to be at home too.
I have heard of other groups from time to time. My impression, again, as
for data processing's flexibility generally, is that opportunities for
work-at-home are *greater* in the computer field
though not so prevalent as to be considered a dominant form of work. Flex
time also seems to be more common. My wife (with whom there are technophobe
issues around the household, though she does a lot better over time) is a
data-processing manager in an insurance company, and they have actually paid
to put terminals in the homes of some people who wanted to work part time
from home. These are always very special arrangements, and they don't always
work out. Also, I think most of them are justified as being temporary and
with a maximum agreed duration, anyhow. The treatment of word processing and
data entry as piecework is inevitable, I think, since there is no usual
on-site supervision for verification of work hours and performance. If you
were paying someone to type your thesis out of your sight, would you prefer
to pay by the page or by the hour?
The opportunity for part-time work in data processing also seems to be very
high. Most of the examples that I hear about are of women who want more
time with family and infants. Also, job sharing between two women each
wanting part-time work is seen. I think the male counterpart of this is the
freelance consultant, but the motivation does not seem to be about home life
so much. I think we'd see more variations if the earning power of the
adults in the same household were closer (as in my case) or the wife has
the better salary. It still strikes me that the part-time and work-at-home
arrangements that I hear about are essentially economic compromises in terms
of the marginal income of the household.
I'm not real pleased about these observations. It seems to be how we are
operating, though.
Back to wizards for a moment. The association of compulsive behavior and
wizardry seems to be generally accepted. Although there is a mystique
associated with the type, I should point out that the wizard/hacker behavior
type is viewed as fairly deviant and not rewarded above the techie ladder
any better than women. I've seen reformed wizards at management levels, but
not too many practising ones! Since the trend is to not depend on wizards and
hackers in professional settings, it's probably no loss that women have
been excluded from that vanishing tribe! (Well, I don't mean that, of course.
I object to the institutionalized exclusion, but just want to point out that
wizards aren't universally esteemed and organizations prefer not to depend on
them for critical matters.)
Well, it's hot and I don't want to talk about this any more today. (I think
I'm feeling overly pessimistic about the possibilities of much more progress
toward social equality for a few years. The racist stuff from women about
denial of ADC, etc., is really bothersome. I agree that we have a problem
when, because of a combination of practices and policies, we are vulnerable
to unliteral acts -- e.g., pregnancies -- by strangers (I guess I can include
drunk driving and not wearing motorcycle helmets or seat belts too). I don't
have an answer to that, either, except to observe that government is no
substitute for community -- but it is the best you get when community is not
in the cards. Maybe I need to state this better. I think there is a rebellion
against the careless or mistaken acts of others creating obligations for
*us* (whoever we are) without our participation or concent. (The war
against second-hand tobacco smoke and DWI-ers strikes me as part of that,
along with the unhappiness with people who plop nuclear power plants onto
the landscape and otherwise behave rather unilaterally in exposing us to
technological risks.) As a society, we have a real problem reconciling the
obligations of society (e.g., *us*) to take care of each other with the
autonomy that is conceded with regard to the creation, rearing, and
education of new citizens. So I haven't stated it any better, after all, and
I've lost track of the nesting of parentheses anyhow. ))))...)))) should do it.cheryl@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (cheryl) (08/02/88)
In article <12788@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> skyler@violet.berkeley.edu writes: >The same friend also writes: >An odd thing for me, though, is not understanding the >gender mix that some people encounter. Everywhere that I have worked, there >was a high proportion of women in the technical staff -- or at least it seemed >so to me -- if not in technical management. And of course the first wizards >in the U.S. were women -- the Eniac was basically operated by Navy women in >the pictures I've seen. That is where Grace Hopper and Betty Holberton got >their starts, and I have had the pleasure of working with other women who >started in the early days of Univac. But isn't it interesting that at this time, women were widely employed as "computers" to work out the details of calculating the terms in tables of special functions (cf. Abromowitz and IRENE Stegun, Chandrasekhar and DONNA Elbert and countless other papers in science, mathematics and engineering on which women were either the second author or in the acknowlegments as having helped with the computations...). Even though this work required quite a bit of mathematical background, it was still often considered to be and paid as the mathematical equivalent of typing. As a matter of fact, word processing has progressed in its development in very much the same manner as scientific computing. First, the women do the grunt work when it's grunt work. Then, when the field requires some creativity and significant financial reward (creating a word processing system or a machine to do the details of your ballistics calculations) MEN in fact, take over. How? Why? I don't know. Then, when the glory is no longer there, all the interesting stuff DONE (e.g. WordPerfect ain't gonna get much more perfect and Wizardly Unix Hacking just AIN'T such a big deal any more) it's OK to let women back in. It's not a conspiracy, it just always seems to be the way things work out. >By the way, it was Grace Hopper who first pointed out to me that computing at >home was a nifty activity for women with newborns and infants. This was back >before PCs, but she pointed out that groups of women had banded together in >the Boston area to do part-time programming work in order to be at home too. >I have heard of other groups from time to time. My impression, again, as >for data processing's flexibility generally, is that opportunities for >work-at-home are *greater* in the computer field >though not so prevalent as to be considered a dominant form of work. Flex >time also seems to be more common. Yes, but as a woman who does NOT plan to have kids and who does not give a fig for flex time, how would you like it if people EXPECTED you to revert to part time, simply because of your sex? How would you like it if every time a woman in your field got walked on, rather than sticking up for herself she just suddenly took a real big interest in babies and doing part time work at home? How would you like it if YOU were expected to just LOSE INTEREST in your work except for doing the piece-work at home and of course serving your hubby and kids first? I just don't see that making a lot of things differentially easier for women like this is going to be better for women in the long run. >My wife (with whom there are technophobe >from home. These are always very special arrangements, and they don't always >work out. Also, I think most of them are justified as being temporary and >with a maximum agreed duration, anyhow. The treatment of word processing and >data entry as piecework is inevitable, I think, since there is no usual ... But don't you see that you're advocating the structuring of the workplace to "ACCOMODATE" women in such a way as to create a second line of women's work (piecwork, word processing, data entry, user services, keeping track of the bosses appointments and correspondence with unix, ballistics calculations with a slide rule...)? Why is this kind of patronizing advocacy of a reduced role for women in any new field always cloaked in this false kindness of "oh we want you to be able to spend more times with your kids dear"? I think MEN should be told how NICE it would be if they could do data entry at home while watching the kids, it will be so much easier for you, honey, than that hard engineering that we say that you didn't like in school anyway. And if he argues that he DID like his engineering math and physics and CS classes in college and did quite well in them as a matter of fact, just point out to him how much more time he'll have to spend on those things now that he's been cut back to part time!!! >on-site supervision for verification of work hours and performance. If you >were paying someone to type your thesis out of your sight, would you prefer >to pay by the page or by the hour? I think they should pay physics professors by the number of class hours they actually work, too. And a thesis or a research paper should be paid for based on the cost of the paper and ink, plus minimum wage for the hours of labor that went into it. I think they should dock the president of the united states when he takes a nap. >The opportunity for part-time work in data processing also seems to be very >high. Most of the examples that I hear about are of women who want more >time with family and infants. Also, job sharing between two women each >wanting part-time work is seen. THIS is disgusting. If women regularly MADE enough money at one full-time job to pay for child care, this would not be the case! Since so many MEN are into fatherhood these days, I think that the same kind of exploited labor market slave role should be postulated for all men with children. It's only fair. >I think the male counterpart of this is the >freelance consultant, but the motivation does not seem to be about home life >so much. Except that freelance consultants are paid about 10 times as much per hour than word processing. Why are you making GENDER the basis for distinction between a word processor and a consultant? Do you know what it's like to go into a job with 4 years unix hacking experience and an MS in numerical fluid dynamics and be treated like a goddamned secretary who (gasp!) actually knows how to use the computer? To be treated like someone whos immediate and undeniable skills must be exploited in the most crude and demeaning way possible because "she's just going to get married have kids and want to go part time anyway," someone in whom it's not worth building any "human capital." >I'm not real pleased about these observations. It seems to be how we are >operating, though. Thanks for noticing the ongoing gender stratification of the computer industry. And thanks also for not being pleased.
ginsberg@lbl-csam.arpa (Kylo Ginsberg [csr]) (08/03/88)
In article <12902@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> cheryl@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (cheryl) writes: >In article <12788@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> skyler@violet.berkeley.edu writes: >>The same friend also writes: >>Also, I think most of them are justified as being temporary and >>with a maximum agreed duration, anyhow. The treatment of word processing and >>data entry as piecework is inevitable, I think, since there is no usual ... >But don't you see that you're advocating the structuring of the workplace >to "ACCOMODATE" women in such a way as to create a second line of women's >work (piecwork, word processing, data entry, user services, keeping track >of the bosses appointments and correspondence with unix, ballistics calculations >with a slide rule...)? Why is this kind of patronizing advocacy of a reduced >role for women in any new field always cloaked in this false kindness of >"oh we want you to be able to spend more times with your kids dear"? You haven't included the context of the original posting so I can't really say, but mightn't you be overinterpreting? I don't really see how "friend's" comment advocates gender-segregated workplaces. >I think MEN should be told how NICE it would be if they could do data entry >at home while watching the kids, it will be so much easier for you, honey, than >that hard engineering that we say that you didn't like in school anyway. >And if he argues that he DID like his engineering math and physics and CS >classes in college and did quite well in them as a matter of fact, just >point out to him how much more time he'll have to spend on those things >now that he's been cut back to part time!!! Speaking as someone who is going to be working part-time in the fall, and staying home as a househusband (houseSO ??), I must say men who are interested (like women who are interested) _should_ be told about flex-time possibilities. I think it is great that alot of men are breaking out of their stereotyped sex roles and want to stay home with the kids, and so I think work situations which can accomodate their desires are desirable. In telling men (or women) about these possibilities, I _would_ try to avoid your sarcasm and hostility. >>on-site supervision for verification of work hours and performance. If you >>were paying someone to type your thesis out of your sight, would you prefer >>to pay by the page or by the hour? >I think they should pay physics professors by the number of class hours >they actually work, too. And a thesis or a research paper should be paid >for based on the cost of the paper and ink, plus minimum wage for the >hours of labor that went into it. I think they should dock the president >of the united states when he takes a nap. These are, of course, unfair comparisons because the process involved in generating original lectures and/or original research requires far more time and skill than the process involved in typing something someone else has written. However, your idea about Ronnie's salary is not a bad one .... >>Most of the examples that I hear about are of women who want more >>time with family and infants. Also, job sharing between two women each >>wanting part-time work is seen. >THIS is disgusting. If women regularly MADE enough money at one full-time >job to pay for child care, this would not be the case! Since so many >MEN are into fatherhood these days, I think that the same kind of >exploited labor market slave role should be postulated for all men with >children. It's only fair. I assume that a women who wants "more time with family and infants" would not want to work at "a full-time job to pay for child care," so I don't really follow you. Also, in the interests of keeping this sober, what exactly is an "exploited labor market slave role"? (More than 3 nouns in a row can get me very confused.) And how does one "postulate" one? >>I think the male counterpart of this is the >>freelance consultant, but the motivation does not seem to be about home life >>so much. >Except that freelance consultants are paid about 10 times as much per >hour than word processing. Why are you making GENDER the basis for >distinction between a word processor and a consultant? Do you know >what it's like to go into a job with 4 years unix hacking experience >and an MS in numerical fluid dynamics and be treated like a goddamned >secretary who (gasp!) actually knows how to use the computer? You're absolutely right, it is out of line to make gender the basis of such a distinction. And I can appreciate your rage over your mistreatment. As a male who has (almost) always been treated fairly in the workplace, I cannot imagine the frustration, rage, etc that someone in your position must feel, although I feel sympathetic emotions hearing about cases such as yours. Let me just ask then, that, we consider how best to try to get the situation to change. Clearly one potential of this newsgroup is to provide a forum for the discussion of the problems women face in the computer fields and possible solutions and responses to those problems. However, for the group to succeed, we must attempt to keep the dialogue constructive. Cheryl, I think you made a number of really extreme and uncalled for remarks in your posting. I don't think expressing your hostility at an audience which has such potential for addressing these problems is a wise decision. >>I'm not real pleased about these observations. It seems to be how we are >>operating, though. >Thanks for noticing the ongoing gender stratification of the computer >industry. And thanks also for not being pleased. I also am not pleased, and I just hope that this newsgroup can maintain a constructive series of dialogues and arguments on these subjects without veering off into invective. Thanks and sorry this is so long, Kylo Ginsberg
maslak@decwrl.dec.com (Valerie Maslak) (08/04/88)
OK, now I know it's "our" Cheryl come back to the net. Welcome back, Cheryl!!!! Cheryl notes that women were "computers" who did manual calculations and were kept on the ground floor of science. In the year 1968, at MIT, as the wife of a student, I worked at the Instrumentation Lab (now Draper Lab) doing low-level programming and data compilation, and my job title was indeed "Junior Computer." Those were the days of keypunch and batch processing... anyone remember job cards? Valerie Maslak