In a node not far from here, TheLady began talking about geeks not wanting women to obtain knowledge. This caused me to think that perhaps feminists don't realize the enormous commonality they have with geeks.

Feminists state (correctly) that women have frequently and severely been mistreated for irrational reasons. They have been mistreated for merely being women. Consider this, feminists: we geeks have likewise been attacked (in the most frightening way possible, namely, we have been vitally wounded on foundational psychological levels) for irrational reasons (we seek to understand the universe in all ways). We are seeking to understand, and what we receive is psychological (sometimes physical) torture. We are told that we don't deserve love or sex*. Neither, they tell us repeatedly, are we really human; we are shunned from human society. All of this, merely because we like to think and ponder--merely because we are curious. This kind of "mind-abuse" is far worse than any physical abuse. If someone is physically abused, they still have their own mind to retreat to.

Feminists need to consider that we geeks are human beings, feelings and all, that need other humans. We are, in short, just like you. Also like you, we have suffered greatly. If you, as feminists, are concerned about mistreatment, please take pity on the suffering of other groups and fight for better treatment of all people. We are neither your oppressors nor your enemies. Rather, we are the oppressed. Think about this for a little bit. Thank you for listening to my ramblings.

* Before you get upset, remember that, for most people, sex is a basic human need--without it, most people will lose psychological stability. Although not understandable to those who do not need sex (which could be you, dear reader), lack of sexual expression is devastating to the human psyche. God made us with sexual needs. I am not, however, talking about the predatory sexual behaviors of many men, nor am I talking about lust. I am referring to the use of sex as the mutual expression of deep and abiding love between a man and a woman. If you are a feminist, at least consider the possibilty that sex can be used properly.

At any rate, this little article is not about sex. It is about the mistreatment of a segment of society.

I will be prepared to listen to these (frankly pathetically self involved) arguments from the first person who can come up with a definition of "geek" which helps define geekdom as a basic biological human sub-group.

The definition of "geek" in the above writeup is completely self-referential - geeks are those who suffer for their active minds, and those who suffer because of their actve minds are geeks. Two points:

• There are more than enough daft geeks out there with little to no interest in the underpinnings of the universe if it doesn't relate to Illuminati the Collectible Card Game.
• There are, thankfully, hoardes of people with alert, active and inquiring minds who don't suffer from social ineptitude, bad dress sense or appaling dental hygene.

I happen to be married to an UberGeek - the geek to outgeek all geeks, he who knoweth quantum theory and applied cryptography and all the Mage The Ascention handbooks by heart and has multiple items of black clothing, some of them leather. And he doesn'r wallow in self pity or whine that women don't pay attention to him or that he doesn't get enough sex.

And while we're at it, one should be aware of the fact that hardly any male between the ages of 12 and 45 are happy with how much sex they're getting. Still not everyone manages to turn that into a justification for multifarious complexes and mental problems.

There are probably more level headed, less vitriolic reasons why geeks are nothing like feminists. But honestly, I can't raise the enthusiasm required to take this issue at all seriously, because serious is what it ain't.

---

moJoe: I was beaten up at school, I was bullied by the boys I had crushes on and their friends, I had no one to talk to, I couldn't believe that any man would want anything from me bar what's between my legs, I was lonely, I was depressed, I tried to kill myself, bla bla bla. All true, by the way.

Those things are personal. Any reference to them is emotive. They hurt.

Equal pay for equal work, paternity leave, sexual harrassement, the glass ceiling, domestic violence and scores of other "Feminist Issues" are not personal. Certainly not all of them at once, not for anyone I ever met. Women (and men) care about these issues not because they have a chip on their shoulder, but because they have a social concience, and they think making the world a better place for others, even if it's already a fairly decent place for them, is worthwile.

I don't see any signs of a wider social cause (beyond lip service) in the petulant clamour of the miserable cases some people put forward to be recognised as some kind of opressed minority. You might as well walk over to the other side of puberty and say that overpaid computer consultants and high-tech company CEO's should recognise the inherent injustice of having been captain of the football team and Prom King and then having to pump gas for the rest of your life. How far are you prepared to take highschool grudges?

And while we're on the subject of perspective, yes, I can most certainly think of things that are worse than having your ass grabbed and being stuffed into a garbage can. Let's see, dying slowly of hunger, watching your children die before you; being sold into prostitution at the age of 8 and contracting AIDS from a belligerent client; giving birth to a heroin addicted baby and knowing it is not going to survive the de-tox because you have no money to bribe the doctor with; hitting a landmine and losing both arms and both legs for no reason; being orphaned by AIDS, malaria or cholera and having to feed your younger siblings by prostituting your nubile young behind and contracting AIDS in your turn; am I getting my point accross yet?

It's nasty to be bullied at school, it's awful not to have friends when growing up - I should know, I've been there. But from social ineptitude to a social movement... No, sorry.

"Geek" and "Feminist" are not mutually exclusive. I consider myself both. I like male geeks, as they are (in my experience) less likely than non-male geeks to look at me only as a body -- those who value their own minds also pay attention to mine. If the two groups have anything in common, it should be an aversion to being judged on superficial attributes.

There are certainly feminist non-geeks who do not value geek attributes, just as there are male chauvinist non-geeks who do not value them. Anti-geek believers are not representative of all feminists, nor all male chauvinists. Anti-feminism is not representative of all geeks, nor even all male ones. Setting up an opposition of "feminists" vs. "geeks" is like setting up an opposition between "left-handed people" and "black-haired people" -- there'll be some overlap and some people who are in neither category, but even between people who are one but not the other, you can't rightly say they have any differences but being left-handed or black-haired.