[Linux-aus] linux-aus Digest, Vol 79, Issue 35

Wed Oct 30 08:42:36 EST 2013

Honestly this isn't something that I would have posted even though it did have at the very top a tongue in cheek claim it's a sensitive topic regardless of gender.  

Ok breathe!  now let's just leave it alone and should more of this crap start appearing on this list I too would be unsubscribing as I'm not interested in this type of crap! 

Just my 2 cents worth and I won't be adding to this any further... 

linux-aus-request at lists.linux.org.au wrote:
>Send linux-aus mailing list submissions to
>	linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	linux-aus-request at lists.linux.org.au
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	linux-aus-owner at lists.linux.org.au
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of linux-aus digest..."
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Special support for women (David Newall)
>   2. Re: Special support for women (Donna Benjamin)
>   3. Re: Special support for women (Donna Benjamin)
>   4. Re: Special support for women (Luke Martinez)
>   5. Re: Special support for women (Luke Martinez)
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>From: David Newall <davidn at davidnewall.com>
>To: linux-aus <linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au>
>Sent: Tue Oct 29 23:21:44 GMT+11:00 2013
>Subject: [Linux-aus] Special support for women
>
>(:-P   (tongue in cheek)
>
>Apparently we need special programmes to address an imbalance between 
>the sexes; in politics, employment, management and elsewhere, this is 
>widely accepted as appropriate.  Linux Australia is not immune to this;
>
>we give opportunities and support to females.  This puts an elephant in
>
>the corner: women gain opportunities at the expense of more capable (or
>
>more needy) men. This undermines their credibility; it raises
>reasonable 
>doubts about their competence.  Are they there from merit or merely to 
>make up the numbers?
>
>Maggie Thatcher was never PM to improve numbers; she was destined to be
>
>leader of UK; she earned the role.  Affirmative action needed no part
>in 
>her glory.  She was the best candidate.  Yet I think she must have 
>struggled to overcome doubt.  (Arguably she was better because of the 
>doubt, but that's for another day.)
>
>I say merit is blind to sex; it shines from inner strength.  I say 
>special programmes damage the interests they purport to serve.  How can
>
>someone be taken seriously if there was obligation to give a women the 
>place?  We do them naught but disservice by gifting favours that are 
>intrinsically merited.  We do naught but disservice by filling seats 
>with lesser competence.
>
>We see ourselves as a meritocracy; for sake of honesty and
>transparency, 
>our special programmes for women should candidly admit patronage of 
>incompetence over political correctness.  Let's cancel our "women in
>IT" 
>programmes and replace them with programmes that reward "incompetent 
>women in IT," or at least to widen eligibility to include hamsters and 
>fish.  That way, competent women, of which we have plenty, can leave no
>
>doubt that they won prestige merely on shining ability.
>
>Chew, swallow, digest.
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>From: Donna Benjamin <donna at kattekrab.net>
>To: David Newall <davidn at davidnewall.com>, linux-aus
><linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au>
>Sent: Wed Oct 30 07:27:25 GMT+11:00 2013
>Subject: Re: [Linux-aus] Special support for women
>
>Wow.
>
>I'd unsubscribed from the LA list and only recently rejoined.
>
>I'm kinda stunned to read this, and tempted just to unsubscribe again
>but also ask how I actually resign my membership.
>
>Except... David, I suspect your view is extreme and not widely held.
>
>Affirmative action in communities that are unbalanced attempts to
>address the systemic issues that lead to that imbalance.
>
>You seem to assume women are inferior and are getting special
>treatment.
>
>Special treatment like being paid less? Or not hired in case she
>becomes pregnant? Or being assumed to be at a meetup or conference as
>someone's girlfriend...
>
>Or... I don't know.
>
>I probably just shouldn't reply.
>
>But this pile of crap shouldn't pass unchecked either.
>
>David Newall <davidn at davidnewall.com> wrote:
>>(:-P   (tongue in cheek)
>>
>>Apparently we need special programmes to address an imbalance between 
>>the sexes; in politics, employment, management and elsewhere, this is 
>>widely accepted as appropriate.  Linux Australia is not immune to
>this;
>>
>>we give opportunities and support to females.  This puts an elephant
>in
>>
>>the corner: women gain opportunities at the expense of more capable
>(or
>>
>>more needy) men. This undermines their credibility; it raises
>>reasonable 
>>doubts about their competence.  Are they there from merit or merely to
>
>>make up the numbers?
>>
>>Maggie Thatcher was never PM to improve numbers; she was destined to
>be
>>
>>leader of UK; she earned the role.  Affirmative action needed no part
>>in 
>>her glory.  She was the best candidate.  Yet I think she must have 
>>struggled to overcome doubt.  (Arguably she was better because of the 
>>doubt, but that's for another day.)
>>
>>I say merit is blind to sex; it shines from inner strength.  I say 
>>special programmes damage the interests they purport to serve.  How
>can
>>
>>someone be taken seriously if there was obligation to give a women the
>
>>place?  We do them naught but disservice by gifting favours that are 
>>intrinsically merited.  We do naught but disservice by filling seats 
>>with lesser competence.
>>
>>We see ourselves as a meritocracy; for sake of honesty and
>>transparency, 
>>our special programmes for women should candidly admit patronage of 
>>incompetence over political correctness.  Let's cancel our "women in
>>IT" 
>>programmes and replace them with programmes that reward "incompetent 
>>women in IT," or at least to widen eligibility to include hamsters and
>
>>fish.  That way, competent women, of which we have plenty, can leave
>no
>>
>>doubt that they won prestige merely on shining ability.
>>
>>Chew, swallow, digest.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>linux-aus mailing list
>>linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
>>http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus
>
>-- 
>Donna Benjamin
>@kattekrab
>Sent from phone.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>From: Donna Benjamin <donna at kattekrab.net>
>To: David Newall <davidn at davidnewall.com>, linux-aus
><linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au>
>Sent: Wed Oct 30 07:31:48 GMT+11:00 2013
>Subject: Re: [Linux-aus] Special support for women
>
>You're a troll. You should be removed from this mailing list.
>
>David Newall <davidn at davidnewall.com> wrote:
>>(:-P   (tongue in cheek)
>>
>>Apparently we need special programmes to address an imbalance between 
>>the sexes; in politics, employment, management and elsewhere, this is 
>>widely accepted as appropriate.  Linux Australia is not immune to
>this;
>>
>>we give opportunities and support to females.  This puts an elephant
>in
>>
>>the corner: women gain opportunities at the expense of more capable
>(or
>>
>>more needy) men. This undermines their credibility; it raises
>>reasonable 
>>doubts about their competence.  Are they there from merit or merely to
>
>>make up the numbers?
>>
>>Maggie Thatcher was never PM to improve numbers; she was destined to
>be
>>
>>leader of UK; she earned the role.  Affirmative action needed no part
>>in 
>>her glory.  She was the best candidate.  Yet I think she must have 
>>struggled to overcome doubt.  (Arguably she was better because of the 
>>doubt, but that's for another day.)
>>
>>I say merit is blind to sex; it shines from inner strength.  I say 
>>special programmes damage the interests they purport to serve.  How
>can
>>
>>someone be taken seriously if there was obligation to give a women the
>
>>place?  We do them naught but disservice by gifting favours that are 
>>intrinsically merited.  We do naught but disservice by filling seats 
>>with lesser competence.
>>
>>We see ourselves as a meritocracy; for sake of honesty and
>>transparency, 
>>our special programmes for women should candidly admit patronage of 
>>incompetence over political correctness.  Let's cancel our "women in
>>IT" 
>>programmes and replace them with programmes that reward "incompetent 
>>women in IT," or at least to widen eligibility to include hamsters and
>
>>fish.  That way, competent women, of which we have plenty, can leave
>no
>>
>>doubt that they won prestige merely on shining ability.
>>
>>Chew, swallow, digest.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>linux-aus mailing list
>>linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
>>http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus
>
>-- 
>Donna Benjamin
>@kattekrab
>Sent from phone.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>From: Luke Martinez <me at luke.asia>
>To: Donna Benjamin <donna at kattekrab.net>, linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
>Sent: Wed Oct 30 07:45:59 GMT+11:00 2013
>Subject: Re: [Linux-aus] Special support for women
>
>Wow. Just because a person has a differing view from you doesn't mean
>they
>should be removed at _your behest_.
>
>Could you imagine what would happen if this wasn't Linux-aus but
>religion-aus. We'd be down to 1 member really quickly!
>On Oct 30, 2013 7:37 AM, "Donna Benjamin" <donna at kattekrab.net> wrote:
>
>> You're a troll. You should be removed from this mailing list.
>>
>> David Newall <davidn at davidnewall.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> (:-P   (tongue in cheek)
>>>
>>> Apparently we need special programmes to address an imbalance
>between
>>> the sexes; in politics, employment, management and elsewhere, this
>is
>>> widely accepted as appropriate.  Linux Australia is not immune to
>this;
>>> we give opportunities and support to females.  This puts an elephant
>in
>>> the corner: women gain opportunities at the expense of more capable
>(or
>>> more needy) men. This undermines their credibility; it raises
>reasonable
>>> doubts about their competence.  Are they there from merit or merely
>to
>>> make up the numbers?
>>>
>>> Maggie Thatcher was never PM to improve numbers; she was destined to
>be
>>> leader of UK; she earned the role.  Affirmative action needed no
>part in
>>> her glory.  She was the best candidate.  Yet I think she must have
>>> struggled to overcome doubt.  (Arguably she was better because of
>the
>>> doubt, but that's for another day.)
>>>
>>> I say m
>>>  erit is
>>> blind to sex; it shines from inner strength.  I say
>>> special programmes damage the interests they purport to serve.  How
>can
>>> someone be taken seriously if there was obligation to give a women
>the
>>> place?  We do them naught but disservice by gifting favours that are
>>> intrinsically merited.  We do naught but disservice by filling seats
>>> with lesser competence.
>>>
>>> We see ourselves as a meritocracy; for sake of honesty and
>transparency,
>>> our special programmes for women should candidly admit patronage of
>>> incompetence over political correctness.  Let's cancel our "women in
>IT"
>>> programmes and replace them with programmes that reward "incompetent
>>> women in IT," or at least to widen eligibility to include hamsters
>and
>>> fish.  That way, competent women, of which we have plenty, can leave
>no
>>> doubt that they won prestige merely on shining ability.
>>>
>>> Chew, swallow, digest.
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> linux-aus mailing
>>> list
>>> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
>>> http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Donna Benjamin
>> @kattekrab
>> Sent from phone.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-aus mailing list
>> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
>> http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus
>>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>From: Luke Martinez <me at luke.asia>
>To: linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au, Donna Benjamin <donna at kattekrab.net>
>Sent: Wed Oct 30 07:47:20 GMT+11:00 2013
>Subject: Re: [Linux-aus] Special support for women
>
>Also, not wanting to give women special privileges is misogyny? Hmm..
>On Oct 30, 2013 7:45 AM, "Luke Martinez" <me at luke.asia> wrote:
>
>> Wow. Just because a person has a differing view from you doesn't mean
>they
>> should be removed at _your behest_.
>>
>> Could you imagine what would happen if this wasn't Linux-aus but
>> religion-aus. We'd be down to 1 member really quickly!
>> On Oct 30, 2013 7:37 AM, "Donna Benjamin" <donna at kattekrab.net>
>wrote:
>>
>>> You're a troll. You should be removed from this mailing list.
>>>
>>> David Newall <davidn at davidnewall.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> (:-P   (tongue in cheek)
>>>>
>>>> Apparently we need special programmes to address an imbalance
>between
>>>> the sexes; in politics, employment, management and elsewhere, this
>is
>>>> widely accepted as appropriate.  Linux Australia is not immune to
>this;
>>>>
>>>> we give opportunities and support to females.  This puts an
>elephant in
>>>> the corner: women gain opportunities at the expense of more capable
>(or
>>>> more needy) men. This undermines their credibility; it raises
>reasonable
>>>>
>>>> doubts about their competence.  Are they there from merit or merely
>to
>>>> make up the numbers?
>>>>
>>>> Maggie Thatcher was never PM to improve numbers; she was destined
>to be
>>>> leader of UK; she earned the role.  Affirmative action needed no
>part in
>>>>
>>>> her glory.  She was the best candidate.  Yet I think she must have
>>>> struggled to overcome doubt.  (Arguably she was better because of
>the
>>>> doubt, but that's for another day.)
>>>>
>>>> I say m
>>>>  erit is
>>>> blind to sex; it shines from inner strength.  I say
>>>> special programmes damage the interests they purport to serve.  How
>can
>>>> someone be taken seriously if there was obligation to give a women
>the
>>>> place?  We do them naught but disservice by gifting favours that
>are
>>>>
>>>> intrinsically merited.  We do naught but disservice by filling
>seats
>>>> with lesser competence.
>>>>
>>>> We see ourselves as a meritocracy; for sake of honesty and
>transparency,
>>>> our special programmes for women should candidly admit patronage of
>>>>
>>>> incompetence over political correctness.  Let's cancel our "women
>in IT"
>>>> programmes and replace them with programmes that reward
>"incompetent
>>>> women in IT," or at least to widen eligibility to include hamsters
>and
>>>>
>>>> fish.  That way, competent women, of which we have plenty, can
>leave no
>>>> doubt that they won prestige merely on shining ability.
>>>>
>>>> Chew, swallow, digest.
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> linux-aus mailing
>>>> list
>>>> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
>>>> http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Donna Benjamin
>>> @kattekrab
>>> Sent from phone.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> linux-aus mailing list
>>> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
>>> http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus
>>>
>>>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>linux-aus mailing list
>linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
>http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus

-- 
Sent from my Android device with Kaiten Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20131030/2294381a/attachment-0001.htm 