Article written by

Mary is a Sydneysider, a mother, a feminist activist for women in tech, and an erstwhile computer scientist. She co-founded a women-in-tech non-profit, the Ada Initiative, where she presently works. Mary also writes for Geek Feminism, and, when there's no other suitable venue, for her own blog

6 Responses

Page 1 of 1
  1. David Jackmanson
    David Jackmanson at |

    I’ve said very little about this, but I’ve been quite troubled by EFA’s top-down approach to the anti-censorship campaign. As I was part of a group that tried and failed to get an alternative, more democratically-based campaign going, I don’t want to be a spoiler, but it seems clear that a democratic structure would have been far more likely than a closed one to recognise the problems with this current campaign before it went public.

    It seems to me that the most useful grass-roots campaign would be one that teaches people how to get around Net censorship, like the campaign Exit International were running in the Four Corners episode in Net censorship a few weeks ago.

  2. Aphie
    Aphie at |

    I think it’s worth noting that as of the 30th May (day after your last post on the campaign) the Twitter feed suddenly cut out the seriously sexist stereotyping (other than perhaps in re-tweets) and started to mention dads, parents and grandparents, too. I don’t think it in any way mitigates the earlier stuff or fauxpology, but thought it was a point of interest.

    [Thanks for taking the time to do the transcription too, btw.]

  3. Lauredhel
    Lauredhel at | *

    More links:

    Goodbye, Electronic Frontiers Australia by sky at witty title pending: a point-by-point of some sexist aspects of the campaign, and a point-by-point reply to some of the responses to critique.

    Mary’s So simple, even your mother will be opposed post here (I know it’s in Related Posts, but it’s automated and it might not stay there)

    It’s hard to pick the most jaw-dropping moment for me, but I think it might have been when Colin Jacobs said that as civil liberties campaigners they will have nothing to do with a conversation about sexism. Every activist group needs to confront sexism, racism, classism and the other -isms within their movement, unless they only want to be a movement for misogynist rich white dudes and their apologists.

    Women aren’t empty gossip vessels to be your pawns and passive mouthpieces: we’re here and we have our own minds, opinions, and political voices. But – and let me make this very clear – when you make us unwelcome in our own movement, when you refuse to engage in conversations about sexism, or when you say there is “something wrong” with us for tackling sexism, or when you believe that being against sexism in the movement means you’re a Seekrit Censor-Lovin’ Troll, or when you call us “insane” or “whores” for expressing our feminist views, or when you speak of us as “females” as thought we’re biological specimens, or when you call us oversensitive and humourless and politically naive or ask us if we don’t have more important things to do (like cooking you a roast, perhaps?), or when you wish that certain women could be censored, we are not on the same side.

  4. napalmnacey
    napalmnacey at |

    That ad is just not funny. I am dissapoint.

    And pretty much everything lauredhel said. (I’d say stuff myself but I’m having a lazy day.)

  5. Helen
    Helen at |

    Honestly, I’ve never seen anyone tell women to STFU so many times in one thread as EFA. It makes me sad that some of the young things campaigning so hard against a system that has the potential to shut down radical criticism of society… seem to have zilch interest in any criticism, however mild, themselves. In fact, any attempt to shift the boundaries on gender expectations seems to send them into a panic and they want to shut down the discussion. And they don’t seem to see the irony in that.

Comments are closed.