[Osmf-talk] Reaching out and diversity (Was: Re: AGM and board elections)

Tue Sep 30 17:39:21 UTC 2014

Hi all. This far into the discussion, I don't believe there's a
significantly new perspective I can bring to the table. I just want to
single out Kathleen's posts on this thread. She makes an excellent argument
and one I fully stand behind. She provides us with a list of things we can
start doing right now, and working with her on the U.S. Chapter board, I
have witnessed her lead initiatives along these very same lines with vigor.
This has been an inspiration to me.
Some of the reading comes recommended; I would like to single out the
article on meritocracy, as this term is often misused to mean something
positive that does not really exist, or at least to mask a status quo that
is undesirable.

On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Kathleen Danielson <
kathleen.danielson at gmail.com> wrote:

> The thing is that it's incredibly difficult to make sure that a group
> isn't "institutionally sexist" which is why conversations like this one are
> needed. Yes, I agree we need to ensure that, but it's not a matter of
> checking a few boxes and patting ourselves on the back. We should see that
> there's a problem by the low numbers of [insert marginalized group here],
> and we should want to do something about that proactively. We can't just
> pass this off on conference organizers or working groups or something like
> this. It needs to be a community-wide priority. I don't think it is yet,
> but I'm hopeful that can change.
>
> I am hearing a lot of people say they want things to improve, but they
> don't know how. Here are some ideas:
>
> * I would like to see widespread adoption of codes of conduct across the
> community. As Mele mentioned [1], the Puppet community has a very robust
> list of Community Guidelines for a wide array of forums and interactions
> [2]. I would love to see us do something like this.
> * Explicit, easy to find, enforceable guidelines for conversation
> happening on any mailing list hosted by OSM.
> * Clear expectations given to moderators in enforcing said guidelines, and
> adequate support for moderators, who are often too drained to step in.
> * Required Anti-harassment policies for any event billing itself as a
> "State of the Map" conference. This would obviously have to be tailored to
> each locality for legal reasons, but having a minimum requirement for the
> type of expectations as well as the type of recourse that should be
> available to all attendees, would be a great start.
> * More scholarships for marginalized groups to attend SOTM conferences.
> (Some conferences have started doing this, but we still need to do better.)
> * People doing a better job of holding each other accountable publicly.
> There are a lot of really good people in this community, but a lot of times
> you stay silent when someone misbehaves. That tells me that that behavior
> is tolerated. You can call people out in a gentle, but clear way. Try that.
> * Prioritizing outreach to marginalized groups to join the community and
> to speak at conferences.
> * Programming and initiatives originating from places of leadership within
> the community to provide safe, welcoming places to talk about these issues
> and work on ways to improve them.
>
> These are just some ideas, and obviously there are road blocks to each of
> them. I don't expect any of them to happen overnight, and I know that some
> are quite controversial. My point, though, is that we aren't powerless.
> This is our community and we can make it better, but depending on the
> people who are already in a disadvantaged position to be the ones to drive
> change isn't helping. To those of you who are in a position of privilege,
> use that privilege to make some of those things I mentioned happen.
>
> Asides:
>
> As you mentioned, you are blatantly trying to provoke a response, and you
> know my intentions were not to belittle male caregivers. That said,
> intentions don't really matter, so I apologize to any non-female caregivers
> who found my comment dismissive. Here's a link explaining why the lack of
> childcare at conferences disproportionately disadvantages women [3], but
> obviously this can affect any parent, particularly single parents of any
> gender.
>
> You invoked the concept of a meritocracy, which is highly problematic. I
> encourage you to read about why [4]. This is not something we want to
> strive for because as lovely of an idea as it might sound, it is ultimately
> just a way for the people who are already privileged to remain privileged.
>
> In response to your final comment about ensuring equality, I would also
> encourage everyone to read this excellent blog post on why simply hiring
> for merit isn't enough to ensure that we're eliminating systemic
> discrimination [5]. It's relevant even to discussions not explicitly about
> hiring.
>
>
> [1] https://twitter.com/pdxmele/status/515906404440240128
> [2] https://docs.puppetlabs.com/community/community_guidelines.html
> [3] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Childcare
> [4] http://www.garann.com/dev/2012/you-keep-using-that-word/
> [5]
> http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/JennFrank/20140327/214022/The_Rolodex.php
>
> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Scott Neville <scott07 at worldsofwar.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> I realise this reply is going to get a lot of people upset, but to
>> continue a theme.......
>>
>> Your message is sexism in OSM.
>>
>> I refer you to this sentence:
>>
>> When women are unable to attend conferences because to my knowledge no
>> SOTM has ever provided childcare, that is sexism in OSM
>>
>>
>> You are clearly suggesting that as a man I wont have children, or I am
>> not a competent guardian of my children and therefore the issue wont arise
>> as my children would be someone elses problem.
>>
>>
>>
>> On the flip side (and this is actually my opinion, the above sentence is
>> not, I just said it to make a point), I am not bothered.  People are always
>> going to say things that can be taken as sexist, most languages are
>> wonderfully ambiguous with 101 ways of different ways of reading the same
>> thing.  Now I know you had absolutely no bad intent and I appologise for
>> the confrontational way I started this message.  However the point I am
>> trying to make is there has to be a balance.  Given enough time you will be
>> able to read something sexist/mean/rude/impolite out of anything (and yes I
>> appreciate by even mentioning in in that manor I am being disrespectful to
>> someone who does do that).  I think the key thing is to try and build a
>> strong meritocracy where achievement (or maybe effort, after all someone
>> who has put their heart and soul into something that was misguided by
>> someone else still deserves respect) is the most important thing.  We
>> should make sure OSM is not institutionally sexist and we should have
>> policies in place to address it when it occurs between members via OSM, but
>> when OSM is not involved we should leave well alone.
>>
>> One thing I have never understood about equality is why whenever you do
>> something you get "we have to ask for your gender, ethnic background and
>> skin colour".  If I am opting in to something I would argue the best way to
>> ensure equality is not to ask, let me be just an IP address on the internet
>> that is as significant or as insignificant as every other IP address on the
>> internet until I do something to warrant a change to that view.  I dont
>> believe we need to recruit more minority members, we need to recruit more
>> good members regardless where they are from or who they are or what they
>> are good at (an excellent mapper can still be a naff spokesperson).
>>
>> Anyway thats my two cents worth.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Kathleen Danielson" <kathleen.danielson at gmail.com>
>> To: "Simon Poole" <simon at poole.ch>
>> Cc: osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> Sent: Saturday, 27 September, 2014 4:57:34 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Osmf-talk] Reaching out and diversity (Was: Re: AGM and
>> board     elections)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Greetings from Berlin.
>>
>>
>> I've been following this thread from afar and am finally chiming in. It
>> took me this long because in order to do so I had to finally join OSMF. I'd
>> like you to note how ridiculous it is that anyone has decided to join the
>> organization to combat a lack of, or lack of interest in, diversity.
>>
>>
>> Since my comments on Twitter yesterday I have seen and heard a lot of
>> people stepping up to voice their support for this issue. Thank you.
>>
>>
>> As others have mentioned, gender diversity is not the only type of
>> diversity we struggle with, but it's more or less become the focus of this
>> thread. Since it is the one that affects me most, and it would be
>> presumptuous to pretend I know the experience of other marginalized groups,
>> that's what I will focus on.
>>
>>
>> As Kate said, it is not her job, nor is it mine, nor any other woman or
>> member of a marginalized community to explain to you how you are further
>> promoting your own privilege at the expense of ours. If you notice that
>> your community lacks diversity (and a simple scan of the names of people
>> engaging in this, or any of the OSM mailing lists should tell you that), it
>> is incumbent upon you to ask yourself why. It is incumbent upon you to
>> educate yourself about issues of diversity in tech [1]. It is incumbent
>> upon you to work to create a more inclusive community. By not doing that
>> you are making your priorities extremely clear. Believe me, OpenStreetMap
>> as a whole has made its priorities clear time and again.
>>
>>
>> The request for more "proof" is an exhausting, and as already pointed
>> out, troubling one, for various reasons. The reality is that OpenStreetMap
>> is a community under the umbrella of tech. It is naive to think that we are
>> somehow immune to the problems that plague literally every other large
>> scale tech community in existence. If you don't believe that tech has a
>> gender problem, and FOSS even moreso [2], I'm not sure that I can help you.
>> Worse still, OSM is dramatically behind the curve. The conversations we
>> have about diversity are ones that other communities were having years ago.
>> No one has ever said that OSM is blazing the trail for gender diversity in
>> tech. You know who is? Groups like the Python Software Foundation[3]. The
>> European JavaScript community[4]. Even WMF is taking a greater interest in
>> this than we do [5]. Many others are taking proactive, bold, exciting steps
>> in this direction, while we're still trying to convince you that a problem
>> exists in the first place. This is incredibly aggravating and defeating.
>> This simple fact is enough to keep women out of OSM. It's enough to get
>> women to leave OSM.
>>
>>
>> You want examples of sexism in OSM?
>>
>>
>> When I get private, harassing messages from prominent men telling me that
>> people in the community don't respect me, that is sexism in OSM. When there
>> are men who no women in OSM will engage with because we all feel
>> uncomfortable interacting with him, and we're told "he's just like that"
>> and to not take it personally, that is sexism in OSM. When women at SOTM
>> conferences are asked or simply assumed to be attending because they are
>> the girlfriend/wife/partner of a *real* community member, that is sexism in
>> OSM. When women are unable to attend conferences because to my knowledge no
>> SOTM has ever provided childcare, that is sexism in OSM. When the mere idea
>> of concerns about how childcare or brothels are tagged becomes a community
>> joke, that is sexism in OSM. When implementing an anti-harassment policy
>> for a conference is considered controversial, or simply relegated to the
>> back of a program book or bottom of a webpage, because of concerns that it
>> might seem "scary" or like we're getting ready to "lawyer up", that is
>> sexism in OSM.
>>
>>
>> These are just a few examples that I can think of within 10 minutes that
>> won't be *too* risky for me to mention. (Also, the fact that naming names
>> or specific incidents would make me unsafe? That's sexism in OSM.)
>>
>>
>> You think this is simply a marketing issue? You think that OSM doesn't
>> have a gender problem? Think again.
>>
>>
>> [1] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Feminism_101
>> [2] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents
>> [3] https://twitter.com/jessicamckellar/status/413009020522221568
>> [4] http://2014.jsconf.eu/news/2014/08/15/diversity-tickets.html
>> [5] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Diversity_Conference
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Simon Poole < simon at poole.ch > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> IMHO we have two intertwined subjects and some are making unwarranted
>> conclusions, if not to say large leaps of faith in the arguments.
>>
>> 1) harassment of minorities and other groups, in particular females, and
>> specifically female OSM participants that are publicly known.
>>
>> It would be naive to assume that this doesn't happen, participating in
>> OSM doesn't automatically make us better human beings and given that we
>> have reports by victims, we can safely assume that this is an issue. And
>> while an overwhelming part of the OSM community chooses to remain
>> anonymous, we have all the interest in the world for it to be safe for
>> contributors that choose to come forward publicly.
>>
>> We need to make clear that such behaviour is not acceptable and stop it
>> when it happens and I believe at least in current times we have done a
>> reasonably good job of that. What is potentially missing is an OSM wide
>> place to report such incidents and get help, and maybe providing
>> something like that should be taken up by the board.
>>
>> 2) low participation of females in OSM. This is what the discussion
>> started out with. At some point it was implied that (1) was the main
>> reason for this, aka: larger numbers of females join OSM, are harassed,
>> and then leave.
>>
>> However this isn't supported by any of the available studies, statistics
>> nor by logic. Only a very very very small number of contributors
>> regardless of gender ever interact with other mappers, mailing lists
>> etc, nearly all remain essentially completely anonymous both in name and
>> gender, the opportunity for large scale misbehaviour simply isn't there.
>>
>> In a way it would be far simpler if the statement was true, because it
>> would be relatively easy to address. Everything we currently know
>> however points to that we simply have a very low influx of female new
>> contributors to start with (this is naturally true for other minorities
>> too, and the similar arguments likely apply).
>>
>> As I said right at the beginning of the discussion: I'm convinced that
>> this is due to that OSM is perceived as a typical male hobby with a
>> slightly nerdy angle to it, to the point of implying that other genders
>> might not be welcome and that (1) might be a problem.
>>
>> Or to put it differently: fixing the issue is mainly an image marketing
>> activity, unluckily a very difficult one and likely slow to show
>> success. And undoing the damage (I'm not blaming anybody for this,
>> getting an article to come out right is an art, it is just a wonderful
>> example of the image we convey to the outside) an in principle harmless
>> article like:
>>
>>
>> http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/09/18/uk-foundation-ebola-maps-idUKKBN0HD0ER20140918
>>
>> does is extremely difficult.
>>
>> All good things start off with our personal behaviour and I believe we
>> should start off by reviewing which image of OSM we are personally
>> conveying to the outside.
>>
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> Am 27.09.2014 11 :35, schrieb Jaak Laineste (Nutiteq):
>> >
>> > On 27 Sep 2014, at 02:16, Steve Doerr < doerr.stephen at gmail.com
>>
>>
>> > <mailto: doerr.stephen at gmail.com >> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 26/09/2014 23:33, Emilie Laffray wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> First of all, I want to say I agree with you and I could probably
>> >>> cite a few occasions where some comments or behaviors have been
>> >>> inappropriate. I am going to refrain from naming and shaming because
>> >>> it won't help and it will only stir more conversations.
>> >>
>> >> It *will* help, and stirring more conversations is precisely what we
>> >> need, if there is indeed a problem. You don't actually need to 'name
>> >> and shame': at least in the first instance you can present anonymized
>> >> anecdotes.
>> >
>> > I honestly have the same problem. I try to read this thread and I still
>> > have little idea what it is talking about. Probably I’m naive, stupid,
>> > having different cultural background from the soviet chauvinist
>> > education, do not read posts carefully enough, blind to something. I’m
>> > afraid that I can be even accidental sexist, with nobody mentioning.
>> > There might be others like me. I tried to skim through some articles
>> > pointed before, but could not really link them to OSM as I know it. I
>> > understand that some of us are too tired of it, are afraid of it etc,
>> > but maybe some others who also do know well the issue would please add a
>> > few specific examples of diversity issues in OSM? These could be be even
>> > made up, just realistic enough in OSM context.
>> >
>> > Jaak
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > osmf-talk mailing list
>> > osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
>

-- 
Martijn van Exel
skype: mvexel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20140930/09c90de9/attachment.html>