[OSM-talk] Should OSMF adopt a policy about State of the Map conference in places that are LGBTQ*/etc unsafe?

Amanda McCann amanda.mccann at osmfoundation.org
Tue Oct 12 21:20:27 UTC 2021


[to summarize my replies]

I think there's a common misunderstanding, so I will clarify: I think it is acceptable for the State of the Map to take place in a venue that is unsafe to LGBTQ+ people *if there is no other alternative because that's what the region is like*. Under my proposal, you could have a “SotM Republic of Gilead”¹.

On Thu, 07 Oct 2021 15:46 +02:00, Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
> what criteria must an event fulfil to be able to use the "State of the Map" brand. Conference 
> organizers that, for whatever reason, cannot meet those criteria could 
> still run an OSM related event with different branding and do without 
> OSMF blessing.

Correct. For example, i don't think HOT should adopt this type of policy.

On Fri, 08 Oct 2021  8:38 +02:00, Tim Couwelier <tim.couwelier at gmail.com> wrote:
> does that rule out having official local chapters from certain areas?

Absolutely not! We need more local chapters in general. This is just about the “State of the Map” name, and nothing about OSMF Local Chapters.


On Thu, 07 Oct 2021  9:42 +02:00, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> Amanda, what about countries like Russia, where AFAIK the sexual 
> orientations you list are not illegal, but which aren’t exactly known 
> as safe space for members of these minorities either?

On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 22:48 +02:00, Geoffrey Kateregga <kateregga1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> The point is, there is no country that favors everyone 100%, there will always be some challenges, LGBT laws

On Thu, 07 Oct 2021  8:04 +02:00, Andrew Hain <andrewhainosm at hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> we’d risk confining ourselves to a few “safe” parts of the world at the 
> expense of our wider community.

On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 20:22 +02:00, Jorieke Vyncke <jorieke.vyncke at gmail.com> wrote:
> And a potential SotM Middle East, could that ever happen in any country of the region?

On Fri, 08 Oct 2021  9:41 +02:00, Christopher Beddow <christopher.beddow at gmail.com> wrote:
> Is this proposal saying that local mappers in Iran could not hold a 
> "State of the Map Iran" same as "State of the Map France" does

My proposal allows “State of the Map Iran”. Since all places in the region (here “Iran”) have the same laws/societal actions, so no visitor would suffer a “legal downgrade”. I do not think it's fair or right to deny the active local community the ability to have a SotM (or other OSM event). There are times when a “State of the Map” event is unsafe for LGBTQ+ people.

In my proposal, a SotM (REGION) can always take place in a country in that region, even if that would require the event to not be safe for LGBTQ people in the region. I do not think it is right to put that high a restriction. 

My proposed standard is very very low. There are many cities in “liberal” countries where people suffer bigoted violence. No-where is 100% safe, While I might have to think about whether to go to a “State of the Map Europe” in Russia, I do not think that the OSMF should prohibit that under my rule.



On Thu, 07 Oct 2021  8:47 +02:00, Stephan Knauss <osm at stephans-server.de> wrote:
> I have mixed feelings about the level of political involvement OSMF 
> should do. Should we also care about environmental protection?

On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 22:48 +02:00, Marie [OSM Cameroun] wrote:
> if it is true that OSM is apolitical

Someone already proposed an “OSMF will not pay expenses for air fare if there's a train option” (which failed). The OSM blog has been used to campaign against proposed EU laws. The OSMF has already picked a political side on LGBTQ+ issues when it adopted the Diversity Statement.



On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 22:48 +02:00,  wrote:
> if we organize an event in the USA and we all get shot by the police 
> because of our skin color what will we say? [...]  should State of the Map be 
> removed from those countries, because its not easy for people to travel 
> to those locations? 

I'm more familiar with LGBTQ issues. I'm privileged with my current passport. If you can share advice on making SotM (& OSM) more open to people affected by this, I am open to hearing it. 🙂 What do you think we should do?



PS: Paul out of habit used the wrong name, and did DM me to apologise. 🙂 It's fine, Paul's a good friend. He owes me a beer. But it's obvious when people _deliberately_ misgender & deadname others. 😒



[¹] Gilead is the fictional fundamentalist christian theocratic dystopia in Atwood's “The Handmaid's Tale”. In the book, women are legally forbidden from learning to read (punishment is amputation of a finger!), needless to say, it's not LGBTQ safe…

On Wed, 06 Oct 2021 23:09 +02:00, Amanda McCann <amanda.mccann at osmfoundation.org> wrote:
> Hello OSM friends,
>
> So here's an idea... I've previously complained when an organisation 
> holds an event in a place where it's “illegal to be gay” and claim that 
> the event is a “safe space”. Since I'm on the OSMF Board, I would be 
> wrong for me to continue to complain about other organisations and not 
> try to suggest such a policy for the OSMF.
>
> The OSMF grants a trademark licence (for the “State of the Map” 
> trademark which the OSMF legally owns) to regional event conferences, 
> and legally, the OSMF runs the annual State of the Map conference.
>
> There are several different wordings of this policy possible. My 
> initial idea of a policy is: “you can't have a SotM for [REGION] in a 
> venue if same-sex sexual activity is illegal (& that's being enforced) 
> there, *and* there is a place in [REGION] where that is legal (or 
> illegal & not enforced)”. This covers bi/pan/queer/etc people.
>
> I can't easily think of a simple rule for trans/gender identity issues 
> that's as clear cut for the very basic level (e.g. many countries have 
> required gender segregated toilets for a long time and the laws 
> requiring ”birth sex” are new and uncommon, legal gender recognition 
> might not be so relevant for a visitor, etc) so I'll stick to this for 
> now. I am OK with “State of the Map [COUNTRY]” happening in a country 
> where it's illegal everywhere. My goal is to prevent anyone having a 
> *legal downgrade* with “State of the Map”.
>
> Many in OSM have spent a long time improving things for minoritized 
> groups, and maybe this is just another step in that process. I am only 
> mentioning “illegal to be gay” because it's a simple, clear standard. I 
> think it could be benefitial to include other standards too (e.g. I 
> believe some countries forbid women from driving). I am focussing on 
> LGBTQ+ issues because that affects me personally, and I know a lot 
> about it. I encourage other minoritized people to speak up if they want.
>
> So what do yous, the wider OSM(F) community think about the OSMF 
> adopting this policy (or something like it, or not adopting anything 
> new policy)?

-- 
A. McCann
Secretary
OpenStreetMap Foundation

Name & Registered Office:
OpenStreetMap Foundation
St John’s Innovation Centre
Cowley Road
Cambridge
CB4 0WS
United Kingdom
A company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales
Registration No. 05912761



More information about the talk mailing list