At 6:59 PM -0500 11/8/96, jbugden@smtplink.alis.ca wrote:

I think it relates to crypto policy via policy in general, also to both the libertarian and the inevitable cryptoanarchy argument we are currently tossing about and brought to mind a comment a few months back from Tim about how the occasional female members of this list tended to not make sense a lot of the time.

Well, I think there clearly _is_ a gender gap on these sorts of issues. While we certainly have a handful of women subscribers, we have few active women posters, and none of the "ringleaders" are women. The woman I am currently seeing is a case in point. She occasionally wants to hear what interests me, in my "other life," and I have tried to explain the stuff we talk about here. Her first reaction was fear, that my life and/or liberty is in jeopardy. (She started out as a liberal/socialist, but is now more conservative/libertarian. And the images of Waco burning leave her with little sympathy for Reno's Raiders and the government goons who burned 80 people because Koresh was Practicing a Religion without a License. But it makes her want to _avoid_ Reno, Clinton, Freeh, and other such goons at all costs, not wave a red flag in front of them.) She wondered to me why I have not been arrested. I asked "And just what specific laws have I violated?" She couldn't say, and she acknowledged that Americans are pretty much free to speak their mind, but she felt that the FBI and Janet Reno _must_ fear and dislike what Cypherpunks are doing. I agreed. And as she hears more about what cryptography implies, what it means for bypassing the usual tax collection and behavior control mechanisms of the modern state, the more worried she gets. I suspect there may be a biological component to this. Many males enjoy adrenaline rushes, whether by bungee cord jumping, robbing houses, or plotting to smash the state. Many females have _other_ interests. Women I have known have generally not understood why I would be willing to be so upfront about my radical views and why I am apparently willing to "risk it all" for the adrenaline rush of being involved in this battle. (And saying I am "prepared," and pointing to the loaded .45 I keep in case the Midnight Raiders hit my house is even less reassuring to them! In at least one case I never saw the woman again. Rationally, I can't say I disagree with their reaction, from a payoff matrix standpoint. But something in we males craves this kind of confrontation. The leaders of the revolutions in the past were almost always me. The Feminist/Abortion battle is different, for some pretty obvious reasons, but most revolutions are led by men. Not altogether surprising.) So, I'm not surprised that so few women are on the list. For one thing, it's about computers, and the Net is overwhelmingly male (though the statistics are changing). Second, it's basically about libertarian politics (some may disagree, but I stand by this). This cuts the female interest again. Third, it's "radical and dangerous." Fourth, the list is made up of a lot of "alpha males" debating and arguing, and is not a "nurturing, wimmin-friendly, caring environment," such as some of the women-only forums advertise. This may sound sexist. But sexism, like other "isms," is often based on plain old truth, however politically incorrect it may be to some. --Tim May "The government announcement is disastrous," said Jim Bidzos,.."We warned IBM that the National Security Agency would try to twist their technology." [NYT, 1996-10-02] We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."