This has become a fun thread over the years, and I probably should let it be. But I have a history of getting myself in trouble.
The thread is based on a quote of mine, and I still believe in the original idea. Early in my working life, I noticed that the BIG companies had personnel requirements that had little to do with the ability of a would-be worker to contribute to the goals of the company. When I was in charge of a computer facility (revolving around an IBM 360-40--anybody remember such things? Oh well, makes no difference), the IBM rep in his blue suit, white shirt, etc., told me that I had more women working in my computer room, than anywhere else he visited in southeastern Michigan. That was because I hired motivated, intelligent people regardless of sex/gender.
The best natural computer programmer I ever knew was a musician, who on his first day in the office noticed that all the desks were lined up in the same direction, said "Oh, no!", and turned and shifted his assigned desk. He would go in the back room after hours when he thought no one was around and play the violin, passionately.
I went to school with a wonderful architect who was a paraplegic, in the days when nobody made accommodations for such people. I often wonder how he made out in his professional career.
As for me, you never want to give me a project without a deadline, say: "Do this when you have time," and walk away. That project will never be finished, though I may start to work on it, may even be enthusiastic. I have no sense of timing or priorities. I need a deadline, and someone to gently remind me of it. Oh, and then there's this gender thing. Nonetheless, I am a good, creative programmer myself, a decent writer who loves words, and am capable of assembling and managing a cohesive teams of workers.
So, it has always seemed to me, that one could consciously assemble a company composed of such people: gifted, talented, desiring to do the best they can, and flawed in some way. The company would have to treat each employee as an individual, and create an environment in which each employee could be successful, could grow, could find satisfaction, and have fun. Many companies have some of these people, but I don't think any company actually seeks out these people I call misfits. All it would take is adapting the company to its highly skilled and talented employees.
In terms of androgynes, what difference does it make if an employee appears as f one day, m the next, and a mixture on the third day, if they produce something that makes the world a better place--and that someone will pay for. Some truly amazing people, rejected by the establishment, are available. That is the idea behind the company of misfits.
Now, you may return to your treif smoothies. I only ask that you chew on this idea between sips. Oops, I need to go cook supper.
S
