as a trans woman, I can tell you that I have struggled because of my experiences of gendered power dynamics at this organization
"transgender African Eskimo" sounds like it's meant to be a ridiculous/comical example. if you want to make this list feel welcoming, you can start by not turning marginalized identities into a throwaway joke On Fri, 10 May 2019 at 18:19, Geertjan Wielenga <geert...@apache.org> wrote: > It's a cluster of topics, i.e., if we're talking about safe spaces (which > we are, that was explicitly stated), then we're also in the area of > micoaggressions and trigger warnings. We're going to need to sit down and > think about what behavior we're already displaying that conforms to the > definition of microaggression and what kinds of clause we should state up > front before saying something that might be hurtful to the listener based > on their suffering and injustice in the past (or present). > > Again, I'm not against any of these things, I just wonder whether we're not > using tools and asking questions that may not be relevant at all. I.e., > beyond the "from personal experience, I believe there is a problem" and the > journey we're now starting to articulate a problem, etc, I just don't see > what we're trying to achieve, at all. > > It's really diversity for the sake of diversity and the fact that a project > has a high dominance of one category or another is in itself a reason to > ask why that is and how to fix that. I just don't see the problem and that, > of course, is exactly the problem, because I'm male and so on and so on. We > do need to find out whether people are not comfortable participating in > Apache projects and why -- and my guess is it has if anything to do with > language barriers and personality aspects (e.g., being shy or not > sufficiently expressive) and a feeling that one isn't skilled enough, not > whether one is a transgender African Eskimo, or something. > > Gj > > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:04 PM Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> > wrote: > > > I think I understand how microaggressions relate to this topic, but I > > don't understand how "trigger warnings" relate. Can someone explain? > > > > Thanks, > > -Alex > > > > On 5/9/19, 12:28 PM, "Geertjan Wielenga" <geert...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > I'm not assuming at all that a hijab signifies sexism. Though I'm > also > > not > > assuming that if every single woman in the world were to deny that a > > hijab > > does not signify sexism that therefore a hijab does not signify > > sexism. (I > > have noted though that not one single man wears a hijab, but let's > > leave > > the hijab discussion, that's not the point but an illustration.) > > > > The problems "there" are actually "here". I.e., when we're talking > > diversity, we're I think inevitably going to be talking creating safe > > spaces, which means, as well, trigger warnings and microaggressions. > > All of > > which are important and should be addressed. > > > > I think my point is that we don't really have a global language of > > inclusivity -- and sure everyone should feel welcome at conferences > > and so > > on. But if we're going to be trying to figure out what blockages > there > > are > > in the participation of contributors based on the subcategories of > > identification to which they subscribe voluntarily or by birth -- > where > > does it end? I'm uncomfortable with the survey, to be honest. Though > of > > course it's important to do our best to ensure that everyone feels > > comfortable to contribute regardless of the various identities they > > hold. > > > > Gj > > > > On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 9:18 PM Ross Gardler > > <ross.gard...@microsoft.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > It is very complicated. For example, your assumption that the Hijab > > > signifies sexism is contested by every single woman I have known > who > > wears > > > one (which admittedly is a low number and not at all representative > > of the > > > bigger picture). > > > > > > That said, there are problems everywhere. We can't solve the > problems > > > there, it's not our place to. But we can solve our problems here in > > the ASF. > > > > > > For example, if a woman is attending an ASF event in a Hijab and we > > assume > > > she is wearing it because of inequality in her culture then we are > > not > > > creating a welcoming environment. We are creating barriers between > > her and > > > us because of assumptions based on what our own culture teaches us. > > In my > > > (admittedly limited) experience such a woman is likely wearing the > > Hajib > > > because she chooses to do so and we should respect her right to > make > > that > > > choice. > > > > > > If it's not a choice for her then it's not something that we can > > directly > > > influence but we can still make her welcome within our community. > > > > > > Ross > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Geertjan Wielenga <geert...@apache.org> > > > Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2019 11:27 AM > > > To: diversity@apache.org > > > Subject: Diversity in a diverse world > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Just a trigger warning here -- I was in Riyadh in Saudi Arabia > last > > week, > > > giving a course in which Apache NetBeans was used. There were 8 > > people on > > > the course, three of which were women completely covered in black > > hijabs > > > with only their eyes showing. I do think safe spaces, > > microaggressions, and > > > trigger warnings are very important -- but in an ecosystem where > > there are > > > literally women in the back of the classroom with only their eyes > > showing, > > > it seems complicated to address this diversity topic at all, unless > > we're > > > not concerned about the diversity issues connected to superiority, > > > colonialism, and ethnocentrism, etc. > > > > > > And... a year ago those three women would not have been in a > > computer class > > > at all, so the fact that they were even in the room was a sign of > > massive > > > progress. > > > > > > Just want to raise this because what some might see as diversity > > could be > > > pretty problematic in a global context -- unless we're comfortable, > > or at > > > least very prepared, to deal with the fall out. > > > > > > Gj > > > > > > > > > >
