[ExI] [ieet] Singularity - Non-Gender Specific

natasha at natasha.cc natasha at natasha.cc
Tue Sep 29 18:37:57 UTC 2009

Well, yes of course - I grew up in the New York advertizing  
environment. As valuable as this information may be, it is just  
pervasive and persuasive frosting. The issue on the table is that the  
real (if there is such a thing) Singularity is not male-centric.   
Since this is the truth (if there is such a thing), why are its  
central advocates oblivious to this?  It seems that it would be more  
beneficial to be non-gender specific in its promotion.


Quoting "Giulio Prisco (2nd email)" <eschatoon at gmail.com>:

> Not what I am saying -- rather, for the same product you need to
> fine-tune the message to sell to men or to women. Come on, any
> advertising professional knows that. God knows how much money they
> spend in gender-related studies, surveys and tests.
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:08 PM,  <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:
>> Come on.  Give me a thought-provoking response.  Not the same ole stuff that
>> - men like tech/match; women don't.
>> Quoting "Giulio Prisco (2nd email)" <eschatoon at gmail.com>:
>>> I don't think anything is gender specific -- we all know
>>> cigar-smoking, football-loving women and men who love flowers and
>>> stuffed animals.
>>> Rather, as they know well in advertising, for cultural reasons men and
>>> women relate best to different flavors of the same message. So it is a
>>> positive feedback loop: there are more men than women speaking of
>>> these things, and so of course the message is biased for a male
>>> audience. No big deal or fundamental problem, just something to
>>> correct.
>>> 2009/9/29 Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc>
>>>> I will be in Lisbon the second weekend of October speaking at the
>>>>  [INSIDE] conference.  This is a transdisciplinary event which  addresses
>>>> the sciences and arts of human-machine interfaces.  My  talk will cover a
>>>> transhumanist perspective of human enhancement as  aiming for radical
>>>> extension of personal existence, and which  includes issues of the
>>>> Singularity.  Of concern, and this was  addressed on the   
>>>> IEET blog, why the
>>>> Singularity appears to be  male-centric.  I simply cannot shed   
>>>> any light on
>>>> this phenomenon.   If anyone has psychological or theoretical   
>>>> pointers as to
>>>> why this  phonemic has happened, please let me know.  (That it is
>>>>  technological and women are not technological;.mathematical  oriented is
>>>> simply not a good enough defense because it is not  true.)  There must be
>>>> another reason.  Misogyny?  Does it trickle  down from the top?
>>>> Do you all think that could be the beginnings of another hijacking  of
>>>> terms, such as with "cyborg"?  With cyborg, which we all know  was Manfred
>>>> Clyne's description of a man-machine adaptive,  self-regulating system for
>>>> the purposes of space exploration.   Years later, Donna Haraway   
>>>> popularized
>>>> the term cyborg to reflect a  feminist theory.  Now the term is deeply
>>>> engrained in academic and  public sector as being attached to a feminist
>>>> worldview.  I spoke  to Clynes about this and he was quite   
>>>> certain that the
>>>> feminist use  of cyborg was wrong.
>>>> Because the Singularity has a type of inference of chrysalises, it  could
>>>> a metaphor for the human species reaching a type of maturity  in merging
>>>> with AGI.  Because chrysalis is, on one hand, the life  stage of some
>>>> insects undergoing transformation; on the other hand  it is well-known to
>>>> women as a transformation stage from being  fertile, reproductive organism
>>>> to transforming into non-physically  reproductive BUT intellectually
>>>> productive, wise organisms.
>>>> "For some women, menopause can transform their lives with the same  power
>>>> and force as a volcano. A woman may be radically different in   
>>>>  now she lives
>>>> and moves in the world, and this transformation  affects all hose around
>>>> her."...  Usually this means that a woman  (whose instincts are to nurture
>>>> and protect offspring), now  reaching outside the body to nurture and
>>>> protect life.  As with  Rachel Carson, a scientist, whose   
>>>> chrysalis brought
>>>> her deeper into  the rigor of scientific study.
>>>> Because the Singularity is so male-dominated, I wonder if it is not
>>>>  almost stirring up what might later be a larger issue of gender
>>>>  misappropriation now, which could lead to a strong gender  appropriation.
>>>> I think this is a darn good quesiton to pose to Vernor ... I'll get  back
>>>> to you all after I talk with him about it.
>>>>  Natasha Vita-More
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> extropy-chat mailing list
>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>> --
>>> Giulio Prisco
>>> http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Giulio_Prisco
>>> aka Eschatoon Magic
>>> http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Eschatoon
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ieet mailing list
>>> ieet at ieet.org
>>> http://www.transhumanism.org/mailman/listinfo/ieet
> --
> Giulio Prisco
> http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Giulio_Prisco
> aka Eschatoon Magic
> http://cosmeng.org/index.php/Eschatoon

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list