In article <33m161$qu2 at darkstar.UCSC.EDU> quinones at orchid.UCSC.EDU (Cathy Quinones) writes:
>In article <33l6vh$r1d at tierra.santafe.ede> cheryl at wijiji.santafe.edu (C. A. Stewart) writes:
>>>Do Not Resucitate.
>>>All in favor say "Aye"...
>>It's very characteristic of women in their 20's to think that all
>>the "bad things feminists complain about" will never happen to THEM,
> (stuff deleted)
None of it personally directed against Ms. Cathy, but generally pointing
out that women scientists who don't even have the right to call themselves
a scientist yet (no Ph.D.) yet seem to think they know everything about
what it meanst to be a woman in science...
>Somehow I sense you don't mean this, you truly hope "the hatchet falls"
>on my head, as if at the first undesirable incident I am going to think
>"Ye gods, that woman was right!!! I should post to .women-in-bio so
>she can gloat!" Keep your luck to yourself, I am doing just fine :)
Hmm. And you accuse ME of taking this personally? You're speculating
on what you think I want to have happen to you. That's a little bit
paranoid, Cathy. You've make numerous personal attacks yourself on me,
simply because you don't happen to like the message. And you've built
some straw-men, distorting my point of view --- that sexual harassment
is a COMMON experience of women scientists at some point in their career
--- into the statement that ALL male scientists are perverts. Get a grip,
Of COURSE not ALL male academics are fat, letcherous alcoholic harassers.
But it only takes ONE to ruin your career, or force you to take a detour,
or to change fields, or to change jobs, or to lose time, or to drop a
project that you had invested a great deal of time in, or to lose the
support of a key segment of the community in your field. And there are
NO compelling social or legal forces to curb the men that do this.
If you complain, guess what. They do EXACTLY what we've been demonstrating
here is a STRONG tendency in the academic community: Blame the Victim.
Ostracize the Complainant. Refuse to Hear the Story. Attack Her Personally.
Claim That It's An Isolated Incident. All the things you've been doing to
Furthermore, in the course of 12-20 years from the time you START your
graduate studies (which you have not even done yet) to the time you finally
have tenure someplace, the chances are you WILL run into this situation.
I have never spoken to a female scientist who was beyond a few years of
postdoctoral work who had NOT run across some of serious, career-threatening
harassment that they had to deal with VERY gingerly. Several, I'm sorry to
say, had solved the problem by along with it.
>the thread, which isn't true. If you want to take this as a personal attack,
>be my guest, it doesn't surprise me, although it is not my intention.
>(Funny also how you didn't reply to any of the other 2 posts that
>"voted" to end the thread... is this some sort of personal thing against
>me? Am I being too articulate? Or is the problem the fact that I have
>personal opinions that you want to stomp down? My reality vs. yours,
>why is yours more valid than mine? Must I first suffer before I am
>"entitled" to have opinions? Nah, I have tried that suffering martyr shit,
Me thinks the Cathy doth protesteth overmuch....and projects her own
little personality problems on others. You're the one that's attacking
me right now. You're the one that's being vitriolic.
>versions of the graduate world. I guess I can't count myself as a
>"real feminist" or a "real woman" or a "real researcher" until I have
>filed at least one harassment suit, can I? Such presumption on my part
>to DARE to present my opinions and experiences! Such gall to confess
>I respect my male peers and teachers! Quick! Shoot me, shoot me before...
Actually, you can't count yourself as a "real researcher" until you've
done postdoctoral work, until well after you've finished your Ph.D. And
I don't think you can count yourself as a real feminist unless you have
some understanding of how sexual harassment affects you---besides to
simply eliminate some of your competitors.
>The fact that we haven't had to
>walk on ground glass, swallow fire or have been sexually harassed during
>undergraduate, graduate or postdoctoral situations doesn't mean we aren't
>deserving of whatever happiness, satisfaction or achievement our labors
>have awarded us.
What achievement? Getting close to finishing your undergraduate degree?
>Actually, I know I am spearheading the movement to KILL THIS THREAD and
>that by answering I am breaking the rules... I just had to gloat on
>the fact that this morning someone sent me e-mail in support of the
>KILL THIS THREAD movement and I responded "I am waiting for her to
>turn on me and take my suggestion as a personal attack."
Oh, so you did it to deliberately provoke me, then, and tried to do it
in a way that you could claim was completely neutral. Nice try. You'd
make a great academic administrator. You to be a real manipulative bitch
for that kind of job. You're certainly qualified. Don't take it personally.
>And, by the way, in the internet, a "thread" means a discussion that is
>stuck under a certain heading, and it isn't uncommon to have someone
>ask that the thread be killed, often because the discussion has strayed
>way beyond what the subject heading implies.
Ooooh a little Internet etiquitte lesson. How very thoughtful of you
to enlighten us. How long have YOU been on usenet, for oh, 2-3 years?
Try 10. You know, when most of the news was carried on private phone
lines on a store-and-forward network, some of it going on the old ArpaNet.
Back when T-1 lines were considered high bandwidth. In my 10 years of
experience, it's the real losers ask to "kill this thread."
>The fact that you take the
>KILL THIS THREAD suggestion personally suggests that you think you own
>it doesn't get you any farther than a positive one does.)
Some people have a way with words. Others...not have way.
>KILL THIS THREAD means that some people are sick and tired of reading
>vitrolic attacks on male academics which some of us find (1) offensive
>and (2) not true in our experience.
It only takes one. It's like cars. Not all of them are going to run
you over. But it only takes ONE drunk driver to ruin your life. You
get hit by two, and see plenty of family members hit by them, and you
start forming groups like MADD. What do you have against that? You
want to blame the victim, so you can go back to la-la land and keep
pretending it will never happen to you.
>What was saying? Oh yeah, KILL THIS THREAD! Pretty please?
If you don't like the message, kill the messenger.
> ////////// ////// // \\\ ~ /////
>////// /\_/\_____ \\ /// quinones at biology.ucsc.edu ////
> ///// \"."/ \_// /// /////
>/////// ///////////////////////Poicephalus rule!!/////////
Mrs. Beavis: Poicephalus rule!! Heh-heh.
Mrs. Butt-Head: Oh yeh. Poicephalus Rule, man. heh-heh, heh.
Cheryl A. Stewart after 1 September:
Santa Fe Institute 430 Kelton Avenue #409
1399 Hyde Park Road Los Angeles CA 90024
Santa Fe, NM 87501