Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Urban v's the Commentariat

The New Statesman has really made me quite cross. While the article itself is broadly correct factually, my main bones of contention are it seems based around a phone interview with one woman at BP as well as a recent report 'supported by' BP but is, in fact, not fucking news as it waxes lyrical about a topic well known to people in engineering and education (how to get more women into engineering) for the past 20 or so years.

http://www.newstatesman.com/sci-tec...iscouraging-women-choosing-engineering-career

It doesn't even mention that in order to encourage more women into engineering it's essential to start encouraging girls at primary school age that science and engineering are great career choices. The engineering profession is quite starved of entrants at this point anyway so just encouraging women into the profession won't address the future needs of the industry, engineers of all genders are needed.
 
The New Statesman has really made me quite cross. While the article itself is broadly correct factually, my main bones of contention are it seems based around a phone interview with one woman at BP as well as a recent report 'supported by' BP but is, in fact, not fucking news as it waxes lyrical about a topic well known to people in engineering and education (how to get more women into engineering) for the past 20 or so years.

http://www.newstatesman.com/sci-tec...iscouraging-women-choosing-engineering-career

It doesn't even mention that in order to encourage more women into engineering it's essential to start encouraging girls at primary school age that science and engineering are great career choices. The engineering profession is quite starved of entrants at this point anyway so just encouraging women into the profession won't address the future needs of the industry, engineers of all genders are needed.

Have you seen this site?

http://www.engineergirl.org/
 
I'm pretty sure that apart from enabling academics around the world to share their ‘wanted’ lists of 60s SF show episodes on VHS and facilitating a robust, decentralised command-and-control system for absolute nuclear holocaust, this is exactly what the internet was invented for - a pointless online spat between a nonce-associated ex-Tory MP and a failed reality TV businessperson:




(etc)
 
I'm pretty sure that apart from enabling academics around the world to share their ‘wanted’ lists of 60s SF show episodes on VHS and facilitating a robust, decentralised command-and-control system for absolute nuclear holocaust, this is exactly what the internet was invented for - a pointless online spat between a nonce-associated ex-Tory MP and a failed reality TV businessperson:




(etc)


They deserve one another.
 
Going back to Butcher's original reaction to watching the Weev interview video: WTF?! You wouldn't even sit next to this guy on a bus. Why did they take him seriously?

But it's true! Even just a casual investigation into his history would reveal that this guy is seriously dangerous and if you associate with him it's going to blow back and hit you in the face hard.

Maybe it's because in his court case he had the backing of respected organisations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
 
Could anyone be that stupid and/or ignorant? Or should we seek some other explanation?
It's trying to keep up the appearance of being well up on things you know sweet fanny adams about (and this generally means shiny new things - see various academic fields for excellent examples) and making yourself a target in the process in of trying to insert yourself into that newness and hot issue-ness.

On a side note, i remember many of us being laughed at here and elsewhere for pointing out the libertarian (in the bad sense) and right wing nature of much of anon and related activity and motivations of participants - that it reflected the use of specialised power/knowledge without any sense of wider collective responsibility. Without anything beyond the activity itself and the pleasure it brings to the actors involved. A profoundly anti-social, anti-working class position. Now it turns out half of them are state grasses and the other half neo-nazis.
 
It's trying to keep up the appearance of being well up on things you know sweet fanny adams about (and this generally means shiny new things - see various academic fields for excellent examples) and making yourself a target in the process in of trying to insert yourself into that newness and hot issue-ness.

On a side note, i remember many of us being laughed at here and elsewhere for pointing out the libertarian (in the bad sense) and right wing nature of much of anon and related activity and motivations of participants - that it reflected the use of specialised power/knowledge without any sense of wider collective responsibility. Without anything beyond the activity itself and the pleasure it brings to the actors involved. A profoundly anti-social, anti-working class position. Now it turns out half of them are state grasses and the other half neo-nazis.

"The man who was thursday."
 
I'm struggling to get my head round this - this guy isn't just a bit of a nasty prick, he's the very worst of the exact kind of misogynist attack dog that targets the likes of Penny - and is both reknowned for it and proud of it. Oh yeah, plus all the white power stuff. All there with a few minutes googling. Insane.

Great, if nauseating, blog post btw.
 
powerful stuff, and I wish I hadn't read it with this slightly nauseous feeling that this thread and its predecessor wouldn't look too great if cherrypicked for quotes in the light of what she's said.

I now believe the most dangerous time for a woman with online visibility is the point at which others are seen to be listening, “following”, “liking”, “favoriting”, retweeting. In other words, the point at which her readers have (in the troll’s mind) “drunk the Koolaid”. Apparently, that just can’t be allowed.

there is some sort of fine line between justifiable criticism and what Kathy is discussing, and it ill behoves a discussion group as robust as this one, and as male dominated as this one, to get too sanctimonious.
 
Going back to Butcher's original reaction to watching the Weev interview video: WTF?! You wouldn't even sit next to this guy on a bus. Why did they take him seriously?

But it's true! Even just a casual investigation into his history would reveal that this guy is seriously dangerous and if you associate with him it's going to blow back and hit you in the face hard.

Maybe it's because in his court case he had the backing of respected organisations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
He is taken seriously by lp & her ilk cos he is their class. He's seen as a maverick, many comments about him being "funny", witty, charismatic. Politics r less impt than being a personality. Not that he seems to have one that I'd find appealing, but I can completely see why he appeals to that lot.
 
Back
Top Bottom