integer on Thu, 18 May 2000 20:26:54 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> OFSS01: First Orbiten Free Software Survey] |
Michael Goldhaber <mgoldh@well.com> >Byfield makes an important point. >> when it comes to science, the impact of this 'confusion' can be less >> or more clear; it depends on the field of science. you'd be very hard >> pressed to argue that the theory of the big bang has much effect on >> social relations, though intellectually there's no question that it >> derives from turn-of-the-century catholic attempts to come up with a >> scientistic christian cosmology (abbé lemaitre's 'atom primitif')-- >> and, as such, can be seen as a rearguard attempt to preserve certain >> cultural traditions. but when you're talking about medicine, the idea >> that male bodies are 'normal' and female bodies 'deviant' is alive >> and well--in drug-testing, for example, where fears that an experimental >> drug's unforeseen consequences might harm women's 'reproductive systems' >> (i guess men don't have a 'reproductive systems'...). these methods-- >> for testing drugs? from preserving male hegemony?--are then translated >> into health-care systems' gender biases in formularies, where men are >> far more likely to have the power to pick and choose medicines because >> there's a 'body' of literature to support the normalcy of their own >> particular deviancy from those norms. women, on the other hand, are >> much more likely to encounter a discursive structure in which their >> 'deviancy' appears at every level: an insurance system's formulary >> doesn't cover drug X, here, just use drug Y, it's almost the same, >> most women don't have a problem with it so just shut up and take it, >> etc., etc. never mind that, technically (and despite infanticidal >> policies both formal and informal worldwide), women are the majority, >> men the minority. never mind embryological morphology. and definitely >> never mind much simpler ways of thinking about these things, which >> klaus theweleit summed up very nicely in a footnote: (iirc) 'i'm not >> about to use literature to make this point. anyone interested in >> pursuing it should discuss it at length with actual women.' >> >> and what does this have to do with this study about software? well, >> now, that's a very interesting question, isn't it? if you think the >> answer is 'not much,' you're--in a word--wrong. the fact that soft- >> ware development is OVERWHELMINGLY a masculine activity is neither >> in its origins a coincidence nor in its consequences immaterial. >> while i have my issues with lessig's book _code and other laws of >> cyberspace_, his notion that technical and juridical fields are >> collpasing into a real-time regulatory regime in which the distinc- >> tion between what you will/not do and can/not do become one--thereby >> effacing the foundation of western ethics--is worth considering. and >> the fact that this regulatory regime is masculine in its origins >> (and, presumably, in its consequences) comes as no surprise. >> >> cheers, >> t juzt 1 kl!k -- ur kl!k http://www.eusocial.com/nato.0+55+3d/242.055.propaganda.html#02 http://www.gmeb.fr/SoftwareCompetition/Softs99/nebulam81.html http://www.eusocial.com http://www.membank.org >Byfield makes an important point. also made [jetzt less phpz] important ----------------------------- http://www.m9ndfukc.org/memocide.neu+improved.genocide -------------------------------------------------- eusocial.com -> superb source for male fascist antibodies. pre.konssept!Øn meeTz ver!f1kat!Øn. - Netochka Nezvanova f3.MASCHIN3NKUNST @www.eusocial.com 17.hzV.tRL.478 e | | +---------- | | < \\----------------+ | n2t | > e _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold