Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Michael S Czeiszperger <czei AT webperformanceinc.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I agree with you wholeheartedly. There are differences in communication 
styles between people, and so its useful to learn how to communicate with 
people who have fundamentally different personalities. Its fun to read about 
the Meyer's/Briggs research, for example. I'm very sceptical, however, about 
any research that divides the human race into very large groups, say half of 
the population, and comes up with reasons why this particular enormous group 
is different from another enourmous group of people. The differences in 
personality types are going to overwhelm any small differences caused by a 
group identify.

This is the same effect you get by making a group of anyone born within a 
certain decade, which seems to keep a group of writers busy who can't think 
of anything better to write about.

Michael


On Friday 18 May 2001 09:36 am, you wrote:
> What I don't understand is, why these types of things are of any interest,
> and why they are being researched.  People are people, and each and every
> one of us is different than every other -- we're like snowflakes.  The fact
> that I have brown hair as opposed to blond probably could be used to group
> me in a brunette category of email users.  The fact that we're a bunch of
> technologists that like beer obviously groups us.  As the only sane quote
> in the piece reads, "The key word is context."
>
> I'm truly disturbed with the continuing characterization of men's speech as
> "instrumental, functional or transactional" which implies that women's
> speech is everything but.  This is a pervasive and untrue societal belief
> that fails to recognize the importance of human interaction.  Humans should
> be more than functional - otherwise we can easily be replaced by machines.
>
> Whenever studies are done on the differences between men and women, or
> blacks and whites, or blondes and brunettes, it denigrates the basic
> principle that we are all human.  Our differences should be celebrated and
> accepted, not analyzed.  I'm human, damnit, and that's what I answer
> whenever some form asks for "race".  That's all that is important.
>
> How's that for some strong assertions?
>
> Diana
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rani Gill" <ranigrrl AT yahoo.com>
> To: "InterNetWorkers" <internetworkers AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 10:49 AM
> Subject: [internetworkers] NYTimes article: He-Mails, She-Mails: Where
> Sender Meets Gender
>
> > An interesting little piece on gender differences in using e-mail. My
> > favirote quote -- though I don't really agree with it:
> >
> > Her research shows that in online groups, "men tend to make strong
> > assertions," disagree with others and use profanity, insults and
> > sarcasm. By contrast, women tend to use mitigated assertions along
> > with questions, offers, suggestions and polite expressions, she
> > said.
> >
> > \----------------------------------------------------------/
> >
> > He-Mails, She-Mails: Where Sender Meets Gender
> >
> >
> > By JOYCE COHEN
>
> ---
> Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site! 
> http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/ You are currently subscribed to
> internetworkers as: czei AT webperformanceinc.com To unsubscribe send a blank
> email to $subst('Email.Unsub')

- -- 
Michael S Czeiszperger
czei AT webperformanceinc.com


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.8

iQA/AwUBOwUrlVgOl/a4Fw2AEQLAqACaAjEATuWSWe45GPhFA/4j5fJ59lwAoP5g
uqWGvCrxnDWBv0mC6cZE2MCU
=qyeg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----