Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 10:06:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: cyberdiva <radhik-AT-bgnet.bgsu.edu>
Subject: Re:



and QJ responds:


>> dearest QJ,anybody who takes the trouble to write at such length
>> to me can only be dearest...
>> reading the very last paragraph that you have written i am willing to
>> concede some more turf ;that in the here and now it is true that space
>> seems to have been provided for interactions like ours...which may not
>> other wise have happened...and i also appreciate that you are willing
>> to put your 'money where your mouth is'...
>> but...[now this is the nasty me] is it fair to generalise on the
>> impact of the medium just because it has not oppressed you...
>> your.."I get my jobs over the internet...I get my information over the
>> internet...I do business over the internet.... to have that privileged
>> communication be available to the masses for what amounts to a
>> pittance(and should also be thus available all over the world)..."
>> smacks of "let them eat cake if they dont have bread..."
>
>Dearest-to-you-back-you-Wondrous-Woman-of-India, AVA!!!
>
>I don't think you're being nasty at all...we're engaged in a
>debate...you're maintaining your position and I'm maintaining
>mine...perhaps a "tug o' war," but a playful one, an educational one,
>and one that will probably lead us to compromises that may help others
>in decision-making positions weigh pros and cons.
>
>I'm a writer...I love to write...witness how prolific I am...and so
>on...
>
>But getting back to your query that perhaps I'm akin to Marie
>Antoinette...mais non...we are *not* soul mates!!  I do not suggest that
>we hand out cake when bread is lacking...give them bread...make them
>self-sufficient in acquiring the bread...manufacturing, selling, etc. so
>that "they" may have viable economic lives which the upper classes have
>snatched from them...having snatched away even the possibility...I would
>say, "Let the upper classes be stripped of any notion of class and thus
>making decisions for everyone else, me included!!"
>
>In the American context, access to personal computers has been
>exceedingly "late blooming," leaving out women particularly, and of
>course the poor...but Americans are catching up.  We women were left out
>of the loop for better, higher-paying jobs (with my Masters degree, my
>first job was a "clerk typist" -- can you imagine a *man* trapped in
>that quicksand ?), for health care, for education, and any number of
>other basics of survival.
>
>When I say that the internet allows me access to information and job
>searches independentently of the interloper, I breathe a sigh of
>*relief*...as long as there are interlopers making decisions *for* me,
>whether I'm a lowly villager in India, or a lowly pawn in some
>go-nowhere-but-down job, I run the grave risk of having the tool, the
>internet, or the TV thrust in my face *without* my being in the
>*driver's* seat.  *I* want to be in the driver's seat at all times...I
>want no one deciding who shall drive.
>
>The inernet has wiped the slate clean of interlopers.  In the American
>context, that's a very good thing.  I don't want anyone prohibiting me
>from using the tools that are around me...it's like funding
>organizations that decide someone's "eligibility" based on an assessment
>of "need."  I object to *that* interloper having access to whatever
>tools of survival there may be...tools of communication...any monies to
>acquire bread, tools, whatever...and having access *before* I do because
>they are in the unique, privileged position of being able to acquire
>anything due to social status, sanction, whatever, no holds barred.
>
>My objection is to the artificial "prohibitiveness" that we impose on
>society for "others."  I would like to level the playing field for
>everyone...I would like to make it possible for those without bread to
>be able to create their own possibilities.  I don't think this bears
>academic theorizing...it requires empirical knowledge of what works and
>why.  That TV infiltrates Indian villages with shows like Bay Watch or
>San Fran...wellll...what's your question?  Mine is "Why?"  Is it the
>fault of the tool or the interloper?
>
>
>> q:
>> What need is the internet fulfilling that you have such a strong
>>  objection to?  That the poor will get left out? I don't think so!  That
>> the underprivileged, the invisible (like non-traditional families of
>> widows, singles, and divorced) will get left out of the loop?  I
>>  definitely don't think so.
>> response:
>> i want you to examine the reverse side....what/whose.. need is the
>> internet 'fulfilling'..those of us for whom english is inevitable,
>> for whom technology is consumerism [tv s and polyester cloth...my pet
>> hates]who may not have the context or ability to cope or examine the
>> 'information'so 'freely' available...
>> are these needs that need fulfilling?
>> NO NO NO
>> you see what a "santa barbara" does to a kakaraparru women whos never
>> seen anything but her village and you begin to get nervous....
>> [santa barbara is this soap that comes on cable tv...and kakara parru is
>> a village in remote south india]
>>
>
>And????  I'm a non-English speaker, and may not have access to a tool
>because English-speaking decision-makers are misusing the tool??  It
>appears you understand the needs of these village women, and I will
>concede that they are not at a point where TV's and other developments
>will do them any good...they need bread.  Fine.  I'm not arguing that.
>I'm arguing the point of making an arbitrary decision to *withold* tools
>because *we* somehow know what's best for *them*.  I'm suggesting that
>it is time we *asked* those upon whom we impose our own biases *before*
>imposing the biases...like thrusting San Fran in the faces of village
>women who, if asked, will *tell* us what they need...this is abject
>*misus*e of the tool...if the medium is English...it's a *misdirection*
>of English communication to a non-English-speaking audience...actually,
>an insult to them.  And women, especially, are the subject and object of
>misdirected communication in most societies.
>
>> "If a Ted Turner can lavish the already bogged-down in bureaucratic fat
>> UN with a billion dollars, I believe it's possible to release this power
>> of communication to the masses."
>> are you then accepting that it needs a ted turner type to 'release' the
>> power..and that he might or not choose to do so..or might do it
>> conditionally...
>>
>
>No, I mean that when TT types unleash their billions on society...and
>I'm sure he's making his little bundle over the satellites that beam
>into Indian villages, and gives that never a thought...that's the kind
>of "interloper," including his henchmen (and women) towards whom I have
>serious objections.  I mean that with those billions women can take
>leadership into their own hands and make bread in peace.  I'm not in
>favor of TT and his billions...and I definitely don't think he's
>exhibited any philanthropy whatsoever by his current "magnanimous"
>gesture.  And what's Bill Gates going to do, I wonder?  I think it's
>time women made a difference, minted our own billions, took control, and
>eliminated the middle-person...how we use tools like the internet will
>depend on our biases.  Will we go the way of patriarchal control and
>greed...then, yes, I will concede that any tool will become a weapon of
>destruction.
>
>
>> when i say control of the medium i dont mean it literally ..i am talking
>> of internal/self correction mechanisms...which all of us have ..which
>> comes from introspection...in this case examination...
>> finally dear qs,
>> i think the reason you are not oppressed is not because the medium is
>> safe or unsafe..it is more to do with the fact that you have in you the
>> ability [and the courage] to question and judge for yourself constantly
>> the intent or motive ...and that - not just for yourself but for the
>> general good as well...but is it possible that there are others for whom
>> it might be too 'late'... if at some point you are
>> not satisfied with the answers to your quest for info and opt out....
>>
>
>I think we can be confident that there are wise women such as yourself
>to defeat the money-grubbing goals of greedy jet setters who whiz around
>the world in Concords making high-finance deals based on arbitrary
>decisions...not unlike the Brits who carved up India
>not-so-long-ago...now the "imperial" expansion has taken a very
>different form...economic...it's much more subtle and surreptitious, but
>the subjugation is equally pervasive and devastating.
>
>My point is simply that every human being, all else being equal (healthy
>mind/body), has within herself/himself the ability to make
>decisions...we are at a time in civilization when access such as to the
>internet's power gives *individuals* an opportunity to take control of
>their own lives...the internet is only *one* such tool...it is not the
>only tool...just as not all bread is the same kind of bread.  Giving a
>Bengali fistsfull of "Wonder Bread" won't satisfy her/his hunger for
>rice...not all tools work for all individuals...but for once, let's let
>the *individual* in question *tell* us...let's not be their spokesperson
>anymore.  Then, we are no better than the politicians who promise the
>moon (well, that's no longer a viable unreachable anymore!  :)  ) "no
>new taxes," and WHAM !!
>
>
>> i have two kids boy aged 5 and girl aged 3..i lead a yuppie life that
>> colleagues in the NGO i work with suspect but cant prove...courtesy
>> of my corporate and harassed husband..and i participate in my large
>> joint family..[i married my cousin] ..while juggling my parents who are
>> presently staying with me...and i'm upto my nose in peoples'...and
>> i dont know how i got there......
>> warm regards..
>> a
>> whew! this typing really gets to me...
>>
>
>
>BRAVO, SUPERWOMAN !!  This world *needs* more concerned, dedicated
>matriarchs like you, my dear woman...*delighted* to make your
>acquaintance...
>
>Warmly,
>
>QJ

_______________________________________________________
Radhika Gajjala
(Multimedia, New Technologies)
316B West Hall
Dept of Telecommunications
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green, OH 43403

(419)372-0528
____________________________________________________