The linkspam-industrial complex (15th December, 2010)

  • Call For Participation: Spectral Amoebas – A Blog Carnival about Asexuality and the Autism Spectrum: We are asexual bloggers on the autistic spectrum who want to explore the intersection between autistic and asexual identities. The basis of this project is to have a conversation about our unique experiences being autistic and asexual without looking for a cause.
  • Hillary Clinton Is Asked What Designers She Wears Moments After Making Point About Sexism: because it would be terrible if she forgot for a moment how important it is to be aesthetically pleasing!
  • “Where have all the men gone? Oh yeah, they’re still here – Men hold 84.3% of Fortune 500 board seats.” Catalyst releases a study examining “women’s representation in corporate governance at the largest companies in the United States.”
  • Women in Technology, Western Australia (WITWA) has launched techtrails, an initiative aimed at supplementing the technology sector with new talent. The program operates as a school incursion to raise awareness about program operates as a school incursion to raise awareness about technology careers. WITWA is looking for presenters, volunteers and sponsorship.
  • Women scientists must speak out: [Women's choices] still cannot explain the near-total absence of women pundits. Sexism must be responsible too. Having both the inclination and the time to do media work myself, I have certainly found myself dropped for programmes and replaced by less-qualified men… Given this bias, I understand why many women might prefer not to get involved.
  • Blag Hag: Feminists’ selective science phobia (warning, substantial “those man-haters make us Good Feminists look bad” vibe in the comments). Evolutionary psychology gets a lot of flack from both inside and outside science. And to be honest, a lot of it is well deserved criticism – too much of evolutionary psychology is arm chair philosophizing and overly optimistic adaptationism, rather than hard data. But I still assert that’s no reason to write off the field as a whole… Unless it doesn’t mesh with your philosophy, of course.
  • IGN’s 2010 Gamer Girl Gift Guide recommends gifts to please men: … make sure to buy the gamer girl in your life a present that actually benefits you instead of her. She’ll love that.
  • (Trigger warnings: fictional rapes.) Rape in MY Anti-Tolkien?: Anti-Tolkien, I think, should be about upsetting the cis-white-male ghetto. It should be about subverting, breaking, and rejecting tropes that make this ghetto such a comfy cesspool to wallow in… It really shouldn’t be about women getting sexually assaulted and liquid brown hitting everything in sight.

You can suggest links for future linkspams in comments here, or by using the geekfeminism tag on delicious or the #geekfeminism tag on Twitter. Please note that we tend to stick to publishing recent links (from the last month or so).

Thanks to everyone who suggested links.

3 thoughts on “The linkspam-industrial complex (15th December, 2010)

  1. pfctdayelise

    Just wanted to add that the quote regarding WITWA is presumably from my delicious bookmark, which was taken verbatim from the Slattery’s Watch newsletter, which covers IT news in Australia. I find lots of interesting tidbits there, I recommend it.

  2. Jen

    -Seriously- don’t trust evolutionary psych, and that article really didn’t convince me. All it did was convince me that there are a few rational people in that field, which I knew already – didn’t convince me that it’s place in our culture was partitheir studies are too easily turned into ammo for the kind of sexist out there who think we’re all still cavemen to throw at us.

  3. kiturak

    Wow. Since in my blog I don’t accept evo psych, period, for the simple pragmatic reason that it’s a private one talking about other things and I’m not up to disproving the masses of unscientific apologies for sexism for the sake of a hypothetical, yet-to-be-seen sincere, useful point (like Jen above, I do believe there’s rationality to be found in the field somewhere, but maybe those are not the people that come commenting on feminist blogs), I was really curious and kind of hopeful about the article. After reading it and a part of the comments, I’m exactly where I was before. I do believe there’s more scientific grounds for it than there was for phrenology 100 years ago, but as long as much of the research seems to be motivated on similar lines and the whole is definitely trapped in a similar social dynamic, it seems to me the field will block itself for a much longer time yet than the 10 years mentioned in the article, and not for technical reasons.
    And as the last commenter points out, the example used isn’t really helping.
    Still, the point about the sloppy critique is good.

Comments are closed.