Are You Ready for a Feminist Programming Language?
December 16, 2013 by Daniel Greenfield



What would a feminist programming language look like? Arielle Schlesinger has no actual idea. But she likes the idea of there being a feminist programming language because it seems like something that should exist.

Zitat

---

In the scope of my research, a feminist programming language is to be built around a non-normative paradigm that represents alternative ways of abstracting. The intent is to encourage and allow new ways of thinking about problems such that we can code using a feminist ideology.

I realized that to program in a feminist way, one would ideally want to use a feminist programming language. So what is a feminist programming language? Well I took a look at the major programming paradigms, the following are the four main groups a programming language can fall into: imperative, functional, object-oriented, and logic. I decided to explore feminist logic such that a feminist programming language could be derived.

I am currently exploring feminist critiques of logic in hopes of outlining a working framework for the creation of a feminist programming language.

---

. . . .
Even though Arielle never gets around to answering her own questions, C+= a new feminist programming language has already been unveiled by the Feminist Software Foundation.

Zitat

---

C+= (pronounced either C-plus-Equality, or See Equality) is a feminist programming language, created to smash the toxic Patriarchy that is inherent in and that permeates all current computer programming languages.

---

It will have such features as…

Zitat

---

No class hierarchy or other stigmata of OOP (objectification-oriented programming). In fact, as an intersectional acknowledgement of Class Struggle our language will have no classes at all.

On the off chance that objects do mysteriously manifest (thanks, Patriarchy!), there should be no object inheritance, as inheritance is a tool of the Patriarchy. Instead, there will be object reparations.

All functions and procedures are now called lobbying. All lobbying must be run at the right level of privilege. Before returning anything they must check their privilege. If any other lobbying is more disadvantaged than this it will win the Privilege Check and return its own value instead. This stops heterosexist and cis-gendered lobbyings from dominating the discourse.

The only constants are the amount of privilege lobbyings are share()d with. These are all real values greater than 0, the only exception is the value of WHITE_HETEROSEXUAL_CISGENDER_MALE_PRIVILEGE which is set to infinity

A new data type, diversity, is also included, which initiates by random as one of the many data types, and changes during the course of the program.

Privileged lobbyings with large arrays are penalised/-ized, their arrays removed from the heap and redistributed amongst less privileged lobbyings. This is called the progressive stack.

There is to be no debugging. We need to do away with functional-centric, bugphobic attitudes in programming. You need to accept the program the way it is.

And like any public programming project, C+= comes with a generous license.

]You should have received a copy of the FSF Feminist Software Foundation License along with this program. If not, check your privilege.

---

(All the FSF stuff is a parody. Arielle however is all too real. Check your privilege and then check your mail.)

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenf...mming-language/

OTH not a parody but reality :
NJIT (NJ Institute of Enginering) has its own diversity programs office and EOP (Educational Opportunities Program}:
"The Educational Opportunity Program (EOP) is a state funded program for New Jersey students who are educationally and economically challenged and who are greatly underrepresented in science and technological fields. "
http://www.njit.edu/eop/

Rutgers University program guides disadvantaged students to medical careers
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/08...rogram_pus.html