Posting from the past due to timezone difference. :X[spoiler@Reelya]
Well, there's got to be a reaosn why someone would put 'feminism' > programming languages. I..am really unsure on how women's rights relates to programming languages, or the usual characteristics attributed to the, in a language to..erh. I really don't get it.
What's with the abstractions in the language?
Well, to explain that you need to know a bit about postmodernism. Really, read the OP as "towards postmodern programming languages", but the postmodernists know that nobody's buying that so they label it "feminist".
postmodernists reject formal logic. Postmodern feminism specifically labels it as "patriarchal". They hate "binaries" which they say are artificial, maaaan. It's really hippy dip shit logic dressed up with layers of confounding jargon. One key thing they say is that propositions "x" and "not x" can both be true at the same. Because truth is relative.
This comes from postmodern relativism. they believe all "truths" are culturally relative. that includes mathematical identity equations involving raw numbers. 1+1=2 is only a cultural conceit.
So, naturally, someone indoctrinated in postmodern relativism will naturally view basic programming structures as a cultural artifact, and assume that there are countless equally viable "non-normative paradigms" that we haven't thought up yet, to rival e.g. object oriented programming.
The Dunning-Kreuger Effect also plays a part, I think: the false belief of an outsider that a field is a lot less deep than it really is. Postmodern faculties (they're not labeled that, they're labeled gender studies, liberal arts, philosophy or humanities departments - not ALL bad, but these are the schools where postmodernists infect the young) teach that the sciences are a load of culturally-relative bunk, so students in these schools have the impression that the entire body of logic, maths, science, IT and engineering disciplines are like a house of cards just waiting for their "culturally relative" deconstruction.
That's the only sensible conclusion to Ari Schlesinger's belief that she can create a whole new system of logic and programming in a short order of time. People spend and entire lifetime researching less that Ari wants to achieve.
[/spoiler]The orange part is what struck me first: So people are using not the concept, but the
label of feminism on things to...imply such abstract processes that they don't make sense--only through the use of assumptions and stereotypical attributes seen by a generality rather than a thoughtfully specified fact?
I mean, for one who did research into the fields of gender-equality or difference, I see little difference within the 'patriarchal/matriarchal' point in that context, other than giving the notion on 'how we're raised, that's how we generally think', especially in a programming language. (...There's sexism there? - was my initial...verbose query)
At the next orange paragraph...I can't understand how that became a trending notion, and daresay a rational fact. Rational because...it's being taken as assumed,
proven "knowledge" instead. That kind of relativity seems more spurious than not, due to the superficial concept on 'this is how I say it and it is possible', disregarding the historical roots and how it was proven
in that way, long ago, and under the note of being "cultural" is...a leap in ignorance. Or, from those who haven't broadened their thinking or knowledge.
What I can't get is why it's called 'postmodern' now. Thanks for explaining it in whole(?).