[diversity-talk] OSM code of conduct: starting points

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10/10/2014 01:08 AM, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> 1. Whereas the Code of Conduct presumes that most behavior is done
> with full knowledge and intent, we cannot really assume that. We can't
> assume that if someone is behaving in a way that we dislike, that it
> must be purposeful.

Thought experiment:

Let's assume someone with a very strong body odour at a small-scale
event like a pub meet, bad enough to make, say, five people claim "I
won't go to the pub meet any more because that person just smells gross."

The organiser of the event gets wind of the situation and privately
emails the body odour person, explaining to them that they have to do
something about it or they're not welcome any more (following Darell's
arithmetic that a person or group of persons might be undesirable if the
number driven away by them is greater than their own number).

Is the organiser doing the right thing? Or is he unfairly excluding an
under-privileged person? Should the organiser follow up with a list of
web sites or potential treatments against excessive body odour, or would
that be an inacceptable invasion into the body odour person's privacy?
(I could imagine that I would be quite pissed if someone recommended I
see a doctor before attending that meeting again.)

We must assume that the body odour person can do little about their
condition, save perhaps a more invasive medical procedure, and that
being aware of the condition only makes them feel worse but it doesn't
help. Quite a dilemma, no?

> What is acceptable and normal in San Fransisco is going to be
> different from what's normal and acceptable in Jakarta. We need to
> allow for tweaks and changes to reflect local culture and mores.

Absolutely. To remain within my thought experiment, the same body odour
that is offending to the San Francisco crowd might be considered quite
normal in other places.

Which makes it very difficult to actually give examples, as recommended
elsewhere in this discussion. You can make a Code that says "don't
behave grossly", or "don't offend people", but as soon as you say "for
example, offending behaviour is if you do X" then you're very likely
already deep into cultural imperialism a.k.a. our values are more right
than your values.

Bringing this back to the men vs. women roots, I used to work for an
American IT consultancy in the late 90s, and all of us European new
hires - from Germany, the UK, and Scandinavia - were flown to the US HQ
for what they called "new employee orientation". We received a mandatory
lesson on gender relations and were told that complimenting a female
colleague on their outfit in any way can get you fired. You should have
seen the incredulous looks on the faces of the European men and women
present - because such compliments were actually a part of what they saw
as everyday etiquette and politeness. (The Americans present, of course,
interpreted those incredulous looks as meaning something "What!?! We do
sexual harassment at the workplace all the time and now they tell us to
stop?".)

It is very hard to respect different ways of life and different cultures
and be inclusive and at the same time attempt to, cross-culturally,
identify and define unwanted behaviour. There certainly are some
absolute limits (just like we have cross-cultural human rights), but
many smaller things are probably very culture dependent.

We should also try to avoid discounting some cultures as inferior (and
hence in need of fixing by privileged caucasians) altogether.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"