I think the idea of women's equality, was not to be equal to men, but to not have arbitrary limits placed on their lives and what they were allowed to do.
Being equal is not the same as being the same. Every man does not want to run out and be a fireman, or a royal marine, and every woman does not want to stay home with the children or become a nurse. The point is that those that DO want to do those jobs, even if those jobs go against their gender stereotypes should have the equal opportunity to do it, although I agree that there are physical differences which may make it easier for one gender to a given job (for example, men can't breastfeed but can give a baby a bottle) which may need to be taken into account in defining 'equal opportunity'.
they wanted opportunity to be part of the female realm (and not just the opportunity to have more children than Mrs. Jones).
But the point is that not that long ago, that was the extent of the female realm. By dismissing the women's right movement as a 'feminist thing' (and by your tone I presume that you hold the negative connotations of this term which now exist in some people's minds, i.e. "man-haters") you overlook the fact that when the feminist movement was starting out, the concept of women not having arbitrary limits placed on them was pretty foreign. There are and were a minority which may have believed that women were better than men, or deserved somehow more than men, and have vocalised those beliefs, but I don't believe that represents the majority of the women's rights movement over the last century or so which, on the contrary were seeking exactly the situation you describe: that arbitrary limits should not be placed on women's opportunities.
"...women can do anything they want" thing has really been taken to[sic] far in this society.
I'm afraid I disagree with you here (or perhaps I'm just not quite clear on the overall point you're trying to make with your post because it seems to contradict itself in places). On the one hand you seem to say that women should not have arbitrary limits placed on their lives, but on the other hand you seem to be taking that back and saying that there are fundamental limitations (and that's not the same as differences from men) on what a woman can do, presumably given the context compared to men (obviously there are fundamental limitations on what any of us can do). It may not be your thing to be a firefighter or soldier, and it may be true that on average women are less physically strong and fit than men, but there are women out there believe it not that are stronger and fitter than many men. There are women who have passed the royal marines all-arms commando course (although they're not allowed to actually serve) and there are female firefighters, fighter pilots, etc. As I'm sure I don't need to tell you, there are women who lead countries, and women who are world leaders in science and technology fields. Years ago, the idea of women doing any of these things would have been poo-pooed with exactly the kind of sentiment you express. Your statement implies that it's ok to say something like "women's brains are wired differently from men's brains and they can't cope with things like computing, science and maths" or "Women have got to realise their own limitations"
So, women rock, men rock...and in the end all that matters, is Perl rocks both men and women.
That's a nice sentiment, but the point is that apparently Perl doesn't rock both men and women equally, or it does, but there are barriers to women becoming respected and established members of the Perl community. Or, as many have pointed out, in all probability some combination of the two. And what matters, in my opinion, is that we're able to have a sensible discussion about what those barriers might be, if they exist, and what might need to be done, if anything does need to be done to encourage more women to be active in the Perl community. If nothing else it might make someone think about someone else's point of view, and I think that any community benefits from a greater understanding of all its members, and hopefully therefore a greater tolerance of each other.
why_birdIn reply to Re^2: Women in Perl - Ada Lovelace Day
by why_bird
in thread Women in Perl - Ada Lovelace Day
by Anonymous Monk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |