[OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

Sun Aug 12 14:46:27 PDT 2018

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.brovelli at 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.brovelli at polimi.it
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Da: Discuss <discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> per conto di María Arias de Reyna <delawen at gmail.com>
> Inviato: domenica 12 agosto 2018 16:54:23
> A: jonathan-lists at 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 at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20180813/a29f2dba/attachment.html>