I am struck by the respect shown by Mr. Weingart in the research. Not inferring gender when it's not explicitly revealed. I'm not reacting just to the gender issue, but to the general principles it implies that drive the efforts. It's so noble, to handicap oneself out of respect for the subjects being studied.
I am also interested in the idea of choosing to help archive digital data - the emails at UCLA, or sending a website to the archive.
I guess I like the intentionality of both items I'm pointing out. Thank you for writing about something I haven't given much thought.
This article did me the great favor -- oddly -- of reminding me of Sydney Jourard's book, The Transparent Self. I was taught in my early twenties that personal transparency facilitates intimacy not only with others, but with oneself -- hand in hand with empathy. Since reading the article, I've reflected a lot on how this approach to life has been marred by taking seriously all the books and articles I've read about "how to succeed" (meaning, how to make more money. The latest trend -- how essential it is to brand oneself, etc.
Of course social media offer both a chance for transparency -- albeit with huge chances of being totally misinterpreted) -- and basically, marketing oneself and/or one's stuff. Not totally good or bad.
And I'm still left with a hum, always, of trying discern being innocent as a dove, and wise as a serpent. That's another benefit of transparency. It gives other people a chance to call me out on hypocrisy. And often, right as I say something out loud to another person, I realize mid-sentence that yes, I thought it was true, and -- it is not.
I am struck by the respect shown by Mr. Weingart in the research. Not inferring gender when it's not explicitly revealed. I'm not reacting just to the gender issue, but to the general principles it implies that drive the efforts. It's so noble, to handicap oneself out of respect for the subjects being studied.
I am also interested in the idea of choosing to help archive digital data - the emails at UCLA, or sending a website to the archive.
I guess I like the intentionality of both items I'm pointing out. Thank you for writing about something I haven't given much thought.
This article did me the great favor -- oddly -- of reminding me of Sydney Jourard's book, The Transparent Self. I was taught in my early twenties that personal transparency facilitates intimacy not only with others, but with oneself -- hand in hand with empathy. Since reading the article, I've reflected a lot on how this approach to life has been marred by taking seriously all the books and articles I've read about "how to succeed" (meaning, how to make more money. The latest trend -- how essential it is to brand oneself, etc.
Of course social media offer both a chance for transparency -- albeit with huge chances of being totally misinterpreted) -- and basically, marketing oneself and/or one's stuff. Not totally good or bad.
And I'm still left with a hum, always, of trying discern being innocent as a dove, and wise as a serpent. That's another benefit of transparency. It gives other people a chance to call me out on hypocrisy. And often, right as I say something out loud to another person, I realize mid-sentence that yes, I thought it was true, and -- it is not.
This still leaves questions about