Shoe fetish?
My husband just sent me this link, Talibanism in Technology, an article by Deepa Kandaswamy for Dataquest: The Business of Infotech aka “India’s No. 1 IT publication.” The article lists Seven reasons why women in technology remain invisible and was published on Feb. 26, 2003 — almost a year ago! — but he just came across it on artima.com. As an ex-academic, I can say that some of the same barriers exist in that field as in technology. “Beer busts” weren’t the issue, but late-afternoon faculty meetings at 5:30 that typically lasted till 8 were, as was the expectation that “tenure track” faculty be prepared to “gypsy” across the country here there and everywhere. These things sure as heck didn’t help women who were trying to hold a family together…
What’s in Kandaswamy’s article, Talibanism in Technology? Lots of terrific stuff, including historical bits, like the fact that Florence Nightingale invented the circle graph, that Vanitha Rangaraju is the only Indian woman to win an Oscar for her technical work for the movie Shrek, and that Catherine Green invented the cotton gin (even though what’s-his-face holds the patent). But especially useful is that Kandaswamy explains a particularly nasty Catch-22, too: namely, that a “normally” successful woman will be ignored, while an exceptionally successful woman will be celebrated as the titillating, if “abnormal,” bitch:
A woman who swims with sharks has a better chance of being published than a man who does the same thing. Why? Because she is considered a maverick. Mass media coverage of Prof Brooks’ three former female students who specialized in robotics can be explained as robotics is still considered a maverick field for technical women. Despite the social myth that women in technology are abnormal, why don’t they get the limelight? This is because only ‘displayable’ aggressiveness results in limelight. For women in technology, externally, one mightn’t seem aggressive; internally, they have to be because of the job, which doesn’t make good copy.
Isn’t this a recipe for insanity — or at the least pharmaceuticals? It means that if you want to have a “normal” life (whatever that is, anyway), you can kiss “success” goodbye, and if you want success, you can prepare yourself for getting kicked over the edge — or being ready to kick.
Where’re my shoes?
Yes, Don Park posted a link to this and I passed it on to the misbehaving.net group. I thought it was one of the better articles I’ve read of its kind.
Comment by Anonymous — January 13, 2004 #
I’ve noticed this, too, Yule. How else do we explain Paris Hilton’s fame and your relegation to the depths of obscurity?
🙂
Comment by Joel — January 14, 2004 #
Such libertinage. Such utter lubricity. Oh, GOOOOOOOOD be DAMMMMMMNED…let them taste my glorious discharge without hinderance anew!
Comment by Anonymous — January 31, 2004 #
Such libertinage. Such utter lubricity. Oh, GOOOOOOOOD be DAMMMMMMNED…let them taste my glorious discharge without hinderance anew!
Comment by Anonymous — January 31, 2004 #