Hello everyone, It is good to see this discussion.
We have a very good community, with talented people from many diverse ethnicities, cultures and gender. From my point of view, I would prefer to see a situation where we concentrate on getting the best representation for a particular event. We just need to ensure that the selection process is clearly defined. I don’t want to see us select people in order to just fill a specific quota of one particular group, or another. If we have a situation where a specific event then has 100% female representation, then great. Similarly for other currently less represented groups. Kind regards, Bruce > On 13 Aug 2018, at 05:31, Maria Antonia Brovelli <maria.brove...@polimi.it> > wrote: > > Dear Maria, Jonathan, Peter (and All) > in my opinion, we shall distinguish between equality and equity. Even > supposing that there were countries where there is equality (but this is not > true: think simply to the "gender gap", i.e. the difference in salary between > men and women), the point is not of ensuring equality because there are great > differences inherited by our history and by our culture. If we want to reach > equality of outcomes, we have to consider equity, which is more than simply > giving the same opportunities. Obviously, this is a choice. This is my > choice, even if sometimes it is difficult and if sometimes I make mistakes. > What we have collectively to decide is if, as OSGeo, we want to go in this > direction. And, about that, I'm thinking of diversities that are wider than > the gender (and, also about gender, better not to limit ourselves to the > binary logic ;-) ). I'm absolutely positive about having a BOF on > diversities at next FOSS4G. The more diversities, the better. > Thanks for starting this thread! > See you in Dar. > Maria > > > > > A paper to read this summer ;-) > > http://www.mdpi.com/2220-9964/7/8/289 > > ---------------------------------------------------- > Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli > Professor of GIS and Digital Mapping > Politecnico di Milano > > P.zza Leonardo da Vinci, 32 - Building 3 - 20133 Milano (Italy) > Tel. +39-02-23996242 - Mob. +39-328-0023867, maria.brove...@polimi.it > > > > > > Da: Discuss <discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org> per conto di María Arias de > Reyna <dela...@gmail.com> > Inviato: domenica 12 agosto 2018 16:54:23 > A: jonathan-li...@lightpear.com > Cc: OSGeo Discussions > Oggetto: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G > > I understand it is difficult to see your own privileges and biases[1]. > That's why I always prefer that a PoC talks about racism instead of > me. But I can still talk about inequality regarding women. Remember > that 90% of said here applies to all PoC. And that WoC suffer this > from both sides. > > So I'm going to take a couple of steps back and start again, to see if > you can see the flaw. Sorry for not having the best bibliography, but > I have a weak connection here so I have to rely on things I have > already offline. But I am sure you will be capable of following the > lead and find better sources. > > Those researchers have the prejudice that a country that has better > indexes regarding gender equality means there should be more women > studying STEM because nothing stops them to do so. So they call it a > paradox that "the more equal a country is, the fewer women go into > STEM". But the thing is, if they have researched a bit more (even just > asking the women of the study why they don't follow a STEM career!!) > they wouldn't call it a paradox, but something natural coming from > other causes. > > In Europe, the percentage of women studying Science is increasing, > while percentage of women studying Technology is decreasing, according > to Eurostat[it was a bunch of links with data from different years, > just use the search engine from Eurostat]. That's one of the reasons > why talking about STEM is already a first bias because you are mixing > stuff. But many authors do this, so let's just skip it. > > In Tech, women are leaving studies and the industry at higher rate > than men[2]. Which means, we have even less women working in our > industry than the real percentage of women that would like to work in > our industry. This unfriendly environment causes a lack of successful > happy role models that could encourage other girls to enter the field > too.[3] Role models are even more important to girls than to boys > because of the Otherness[4]. By default, everything is male. > > So, first loop that explains the "paradox". > > But even then, why are there fewer female college students in STEM? > Because, as all the links I posted previously already explained, > society pushes you out of STEM [5] [6]. Only stubborn woman like me > get far and it is just a matter of time to get burned because of this > unfriendly environment. > > And there's more variables that influences why women are not into STEM > in supposedly "more egalitarian countries", but I don't think I should > extend more here. I am more than happy to have a BoF session about > diversity in next FOSS4G to extend the subject. Or in any other FOSS4G > I can attend. > > So yes, that study is highly biased. In just a couple of paragraphs I > dig deeper than they did on their study about why that "paradox". And > yes, even the peer reviews were unable to see something so obvious. > Maybe because they are biased too[1]? Probably. I am not saying they > are evil on purpose or anything. I'm just saying their study is very > superficial. Just crunching a lot of data from one side and trying to > explain a multi-variable outcome with that. > > To summarize: what can we do from OSGeo? Provide a welcoming friendly > environment, encourage those that are already on their path and > provide enough role models for all diverse groups. That's what I am > going to fight for. And as this is a global organization, until our > global demography statistics match the world statistics, we will be > doing something wrong. > > > [1] https://www.ted.com/talks/paul_piff_does_money_make_you_mean > [2] http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0019793915594597 > [3] > https://thesocietypages.org/trot/2017/02/22/the-role-of-female-role-models/ > [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other_(philosophy) > [5] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11199-011-0051-0 > [6] http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0038040714547770 > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
