[ILUG] [OT] noncomputing nonscience in secondary.

[kevin lyda]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 11:49:07AM +0100, John P. Looney (Kate) wrote:
>  If more and more girls are to get into computing, they will have to be
> provided with an environment where from early on, they can produce
> something useful. Programming that *does stuff*, not that prints text to
> the screen. The web is a perfect way of doing this. Get kids making web
> pages - simplest way of making something "useful".
> 
>  Could any women on the list comment on this (take me out over being
> simple, etc) ?

while you never mention it, it seems an easy assumption that you're
implying that two x chromosomes yield a lack of hack appreciation,
while an x/y combo yields an insatiable desire to hack.  in the room
behind me i can point out a virtual zoo of marketting weasels to
counteract that description (though they do gawk incomprehensibly
at new car engines out front on occasion) on the male side.  and
after purchasing a wet/dry electric shaver that recharges with no
metal contacts i had to refuse a female coworker's request to take
it apart to see how it worked.

while i'm sure there's a genetic component to our behaviours, at best it
provides a range of abilities.  i might have the genetic stuff to be a
farmer and do all the physical work involved (and i have the relatives
to prove it) but years of sitting on my ass in front of a keyboard have
heightened my chances of a massive coronary while moving bales of hay.

perhaps parenting classes would help in this regard...

actually lunch would help at the moment, so i'm outta here!

kevin
-- 
kevin at suberic.net       "we were goin' for breakfast.  in canada.  we
fork()'ed on 37058400    made a deal: if she'd stop hookin', i'd stop
meatspace place: work    shootin' people.  maybe we were aiming high."
                                                   --porter, "payback"