Sisters with Transistors • Hacker News Board

Re: Sisters with Transistors

#21

Post by fao_ » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 3:23 PM UTC

Fellshard wrote: post #17

norswap wrote: post #15

I wish we could appreciate women's talents without feeling forced to prefix the whole thing with a blob about restoring them to their righteous place on the pantheon of whatever.

Moralized language makes it significantly more difficult to criticize, as doing so makes you immoral by implication, so any actual argument can be slapped down and ignored.

Would you mind explaining what argument you are referring to? You seem to have some context that I (and presumably other people) don't.

Re: Sisters with Transistors

#22

Post by fao_ » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 3:26 PM UTC

teddyh wrote: post #20

nerdponx wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you can go back in time and put them in the pantheon back then, I don't see much of an alternative.

Violence begets violence, and likewise, discrimination begets reverse discrimination. Someone must step up and end the cycle.

Can you explain how a media collage of archival video of women pioneering early work in synthesizers is discriminating towards men? I'm not sure I see how that is the case.

Re: Sisters with Transistors

#23

Post by teddyh » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 3:45 PM UTC

fao_ wrote: post #22

teddyh wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Violence begets violence, and likewise, discrimination begets reverse discrimination. Someone must step up and end the cycle.

Can you explain how a media collage of archival video of women pioneering early work in synthesizers is discriminating towards men? I'm not sure I see how that is the case.

I am not the GP poster, and so I was not commenting on this specific case, but only on the more general principle. But if we apply the general principle to this case, it can be argued that placing women on a pedestal like this is both demeaning and othering them.

Re: Sisters with Transistors

#24

Post by alamortsubite » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 3:48 PM UTC

The highly-entertaining 1993 documentary "Theremin: An Electronic Odyssey" [1] devotes much attention to Clara Rockmore [2], an incredible figure I'm glad to see is a subject of this new film. I think it's fair to say Leon Theremin wouldn't have made it far without her.

1: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108323

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clara_Rockmore

Re: Sisters with Transistors

#25

Post by throwaway1090 » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 3:53 PM UTC

teddyh wrote: post #23

fao_ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how a media collage of archival video of women pioneering early work in synthesizers is discriminating towards men? I'm not sure I see how that is the case.

I am not the GP poster, and so I was not commenting on this specific case, but only on the more general principle. But if we apply the general principle to this case, it can be argued that placing women on a pedestal like this is both demeaning and othering them.

It's not close to putting on a pedestal. They are just being given their fair share, no more, no less. Actually it's not even fair, as most of them are dead.

Re: Sisters with Transistors

#26

Post by creamynebula » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 4:00 PM UTC

mcwone wrote: post #16

Too bad the article does not mention Constance Demby. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ire8pSPvX1o

Thank you for mentioning her, I'm listening to Novus Magnificat and it is lovely!

Re: Sisters with Transistors

#27

Post by incanus77 » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 4:00 PM UTC

norswap wrote: post #15

I wish we could appreciate women's talents without feeling forced to prefix the whole thing with a blob about restoring them to their righteous place on the pantheon of whatever.

> I wish we could appreciate women's talents

Yeah, so do women of the last few centuries! (and more)

Re: Sisters with Transistors

#28

Post by fao_ » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 4:03 PM UTC

teddyh wrote: post #23

fao_ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how a media collage of archival video of women pioneering early work in synthesizers is discriminating towards men? I'm not sure I see how that is the case.

I am not the GP poster, and so I was not commenting on this specific case, but only on the more general principle. But if we apply the general principle to this case, it can be argued that placing women on a pedestal like this is both demeaning and othering them.

I'm... really (honestly!) not sure how this demeans women? Like to put it clearer: I absolutely in no way can see even a path to understanding how it is demeaning to talk about things people did in the past, that were deliberately ignored or buried, because of their gender.

I'm also not really sure what you mean by "general principle", either, to be honest?

Thanks in advance!

Re: Sisters with Transistors

#29

Post by deeblering4 » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 4:06 PM UTC

norswap wrote: post #15

I wish we could appreciate women's talents without feeling forced to prefix the whole thing with a blob about restoring them to their righteous place on the pantheon of whatever.

Women have been oppressed for centuries, and in the grand scheme we are only just beginning to emerge from that (in america).

Today it is absolutely necessary to “prefix the thing” and there is still a long road ahead of damage to undo.

After equality has been the norm for several generations (it is still not the norm today), maybe then we’ll be ready to talk about removing the prefix.

Re: Sisters with Transistors

#30

Post by allturtles » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 4:11 PM UTC

norswap wrote: post #15

I wish we could appreciate women's talents without feeling forced to prefix the whole thing with a blob about restoring them to their righteous place on the pantheon of whatever.

I particularly don't get the "dead" part about complaining about "dead white men." We all end up dead, one way or another. It will happen to the sisters with transistors, too.