bionet.bionette or bionet.women ?

Tony Travis ajt at uk.ac.sari.rri
Wed Sep 2 09:04:17 EST 1992


In article <9282125555.MIN-LFHCa26691.bionet-news at uk.ac.daresbury> you write:
: [...]
: I said, I can stand any name, but I _prefer_ bionette.women.
                                                     ^^
Maybe you have hit on the solution to please everyone, Kay: We can just
rename the entire hierarchy from bionet to bionette ;-)

Seriously though, I agree with Dave's point about the purpose of
bionet.  I think that a genderless name would have been more
appropriate in the first place, actually, and something like
bionet.talk would make it clear that the group was a forum for all to
participate in (male and female) about issues of unfair treatment in
general as it relates to working biologists.  This would also allow the
issue of racial (as well as sexual) discrimination in science to be
discussed.

I described the bionette proposal as 'stupid' because I believe that
the issues it raises are a serious concern to all of us, not just
women.  I thought that the resounding silence in response to the CFD
indicated that most men reading bionet are NOT chauvinists?  On the
contrary, we want to make sure that the men who DO have victorian
attitudes to women scientists know that they are in the minority.

	Tony.

--
Dr. A.J.Travis,                       |  Tony Travis
Rowett Research Institute,            |  JANET: <ajt at uk.ac.sari.rri>
Greenburn Road, Bucksburn,            |  other: <ajt at rri.sari.ac.uk>
Aberdeen, AB2 9SB. UK.                |  phone: 0224-712751



More information about the Bioforum mailing list