3/14/2005
Thoughts on Mars, Venus and Diversity
There’s been a lot of interesting conversation lately in one circle I read. Two strains of conversations echoing out there catch my attention, but only enough for brief comment.
BlogHerCon is an interesting thread kicking around. Speaking as one of the boys, we are inherently too damn male dominated. That’s pretty obvious to anyone who reads with an open mind. There’s a closed circle. A boys club that exists. And the fella who deny it are blind, stupid or obtuse. (Hey, I call ‘em like I see ‘em). No matter what the espoused philosophy of conferences has been, they’re male dominated, to our detriment.
Then there’s the whole theme of diversity in general. Jeneane made some outstanding points that set me off to thinking and writing about some of my adult experiences having grown up in the salad bowl that is Los Angeles. Those thoughts, that writing, have not made it here yet. I don’t know if they will. Halley jumped on the bandwagon by making it a point to note some diverse links. Noble and just causes indeed.
But I did note that in general, the gals all seem to link to the guys, spreading the linky love around and boosting the rankings of the guys, while in most cases (most, not all) didn’t link back to the girls except with some patronizing comments. Now I notice I linked three of the gals, but no guys here. If you must read something into that, read that I’m too tired and lazy to do the research to name names and dig any further. In short, I don’t care enough to dig deeper.
Observation
I said the other day on the Internet we’re all equidistant. But there’s more. On the Internet, we have no gender. On the Internet we have no color or ethnicity. On the Internet we have no sexual preference. On the Internet we have no geographic boundaries.
On the Net we are embraced or rejected, loved or hated, admired or despised for our words and actions. And loathe as I am to offer another disclaimer, my policy on such is here.
Filed by Ken at 7:16 pm under General
“On the Internet, we have no gender. On the Internet we have no color or ethnicity. On the Internet we have no sexual preference. On the Internet we have no geographic boundaries.”
This is true only to a point. Granted, one can always purposely mask or even mislead about one’s traits. If, however, one is using their own name…gender is often a much easier thing to suss out than color, ethnicity, nationality, sexual preference.
So the same conscious or unconscious bias that Malcolm Gladwell recently addressed in Blink can still take place on the web, although admittedly it’s a much dicier proposition.
Thanks so much for commenting Elisa. Of course you’re absolutely right. As is often my failing, I took a very deep and important subject and didn’t really give it due attention. Those of us who are open and honest on the net do freely give gender, race, geographic and other information. I would have been much clearer to say those things don’t matter. Much like the old “on the Internet nobody knows you’re a dog” cartoon, my intent was to say that many of us focus on evaluating based on the content and value of what someone says rather than their characterstics as an individual.
It’s a slippery slope to be sure. I’m finding as I re-evaluate my own links and such that, while I think I’m not cut of that particular cloth, I really do behave very much in that manner which distresses me.
Your taking the time to comment also helped in my reassessment of how/if I even maintain a blogroll here. Thanks again for speaking up. And it’s so nice to see someone I don’t know drop in and leave a comment.
My pleasure. I really enjoy your rather mature (and rare) perspective that people raising issues doesn’t equal them attacking you personally. Your new post on considering your blog roll is just one example.