[OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G

[Ben Caradoc-Davies]

On 13/08/18 07:31, Maria Antonia Brovelli wrote:
> 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.

I like diversity. I want equality of opportunity. While I believe that 
it is important to measure outcomes to identify and eliminate 
discrimination (including structural discrimination), outcomes are also 
affected by individual choice. While I would like equality of outcome to 
follow directly from equality of opportunity in all fields, large 
studies, including the STEM study discussed earlier, suggest that men 
and women have statistically significant differences in preference for 
fields of endeavour and balance between remuneration, conditions, and 
risk. The reasons for this are open for conjecture but the numbers are 
clear.

For example, about half the 7% gender pay gap amongst Uber drivers is 
due to men driving 2.2% faster, and about 20% of the gap is due to men 
driving at more dangerous times and locations (I consider this economic 
impact of violence against women as structural discrimination):
https://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/researchers-detailed-male-uber-drivers-make-132101042.html

Improvements in outcomes are a valuable measure of success, but I do not 
think that equality of outcome should be a goal in itself. Attempts to 
impose equality of outcome may be frustrated by gender differences in 
preference. Ill-considered measures such as quotas risk causing harm by 
discriminating against candidates with greater merit. I support equality 
of opportunity and the elimination of discrimination because these are 
beneficial and, as far as I can tell, without harmful side-effects.

Kind regards,

-- 
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben at transient.nz>
Director
Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/>
New Zealand