The idea that it is 'wrong' to even consider there might be genetic differences went out ages ago. This was based on the notion of 'tabula rasa', that people are completely blank slates. That idea doesn't have any place in science or biology any more, in the same manner that geo-centrism doesn't really feature in astronomy as an absolute truth.Sorry about the confusion with my headers.
In Val Henson's HOWTO, Section 2 she insists that the women are socialised to be less inclined towards computer science:
"If you are unwilling to accept that women's lack of interest in computing is genetically predetermined (and I hope you aren't willing to accept it), you need to start exploring what environmental causes are involved."
If we accept the premise that women would be equally interested in Free Software in a society that did not discourage them from doing so or render them less inclined to do so, then an ultimate goal of 50:50 seems pretty fair.
IF men and women are equal in aptitude for working in computers AND are equally inclined to participate in Free Software activism THEN men and women should participate in FS activism in equal numbers. Ergo 50:50.
But given that our reality is not so egalitarian, I proposed that the ratio of men and women should be at least what it is in proprietary software. (About 1:2) It's a tangible point of reference if nothing else.
None of this excuses the lamentable behaviour of some guys in FOSS, of course.
- Alex
Sent from my toasterOn Jan 16, 2012 12:27 AM, "Ben Finney" <ben+freesoftware@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
(Alex, can you please fix your ‘From’ field so that, like your
signature, it gives your proper name.)
Clockwork PC <clockworkpc@gmail.com>
writes:
> But 28% is nowhere near parity, and it raises the question of whether
> 50/50 is a realistic goal.
I don't know who is promoting parity, or 50/50. I would appreciate a
Message-Id to whatever message you're getting that idea from.
Who is proposing that goal? If no-one, why are you criticising it?
> Far more importantly than how many women there are in open source is
> *how happy the women in open source are*. Even if 28% women is the
> very highest participation rate we can get, given the society we live,
> our goal should be that the women in open source get to feel safe and
> included in our movement.
Right. Given the apparent fact that free-software participation from
women is at single-digit percentages, I'd say that supports the idea we
are a long way from this laudable goal.
--
\ “I don't want to live peacefully with difficult realities, and |
`\ I see no virtue in savoring excuses for avoiding a search for |
_o__) real answers.” —Paul Z. Myers, 2009-09-12 |
Ben Finney
_______________________________________________
Free-software-melb mailing list
Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au
http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb
_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb