Re: [Gendispatch] draft charter text: terminology-related WG

[Jay Daley <[e-mail]>]

> On 16/02/2021, at 5:05 PM, Fernando Gont <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> On 15/2/21 20:15, Jay Daley wrote:
> [...]
>> I understand that you might think I am demanding public fealty to a view you don’t hold and that was not my intent, so let me restate the second part of my response to the original strawmen in narrower terms:
>> - The alternative of wealthy, credentialed, white people [a phrase taken directly from one of the strawmen] obstructing or preventing others from taking the issue of diversity and inclusivity seriously enough to try to explicitly and publicly change their behaviours, makes me wary that either they are racist, or sympathise with racists, or seek to diminish or ignore the historic impact of racism.
> 
> I think you've totally misunderstood the point that some of us have tried to make.

The points you are making below are quite different from the points others have made that I was responding to above. 
> 
> My point has been that avoiding the use of possibly derogatory language should not be portrayed as "taking the issue of diversity and inclusivity seriously enough".
> 
> You're really underestimating the problem if you think that by avoiding a few dozen words you'll be making the IETF any (meaningfully) more inclusive and diverse.

Those are two separate things:
- Yes I believe that avoiding a few words will make the IETF meaningfully more inclusive and diverse.  A consensus public statement would have widespread impact 
- No I do not believe this is all that it takes. There are indeed many other components to diversity and inclusivity and some are far harder to solve and will have a far greater impact when solved. 

> I'm all for not employing language that might be considered derogatory by some (or that is right away derogatory). That's, in my book, a matter of respect for other fellow human beings -- not something that fosters diversity or inclusiveness.

It surprises me that you do not think increased respect leads to increased diversity and inclusivity.  Do you primarily view diversity and inclusivity from more practical dimensions, such as country of residence or type of employer?
> 
> Unfortunately, because of a number of structural issues, most of the people that would find a number of words particularly offensive won't participate in the mailing-lists or even read the documents we produce, because such structural issues prevent them from doing so.
> 
> So my comments have been a plea to put the underlying issues on the agenda, such that rather than second-guessing how currently under-represented or excluded people feel, we do our best to give them the opportunity to speak for themselves.

I was. 

Jay

-- 
Jay Daley
IETF Executive Director

> 
> Thanks,
> -- 
> Fernando Gont
> e-mail: [e-mail] || [e-mail]
> PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
> 
> 
>