Re: [Gendispatch] revised

[Dan Harkins <[e-mail]>]

   Hi Fernando,

On 2/22/21 4:29 PM, Fernando Gont wrote:
> Hello, Sean,
>
> On 22/2/21 12:59, Sean Turner wrote:
> [...]
>>
>> (3) recommendation to replace “Effective” with “Inclusive" in the WG 
>> name. I didn't see much support and some people want to spend time 
>> defining inclusive first.
>
> As someone that has asked a few times what people mean when they talk 
> about diversity and inclusiveness, let me just say that I don't and 
> didn't "want to spend time in defining 'inclusive' first".
>
> I was simply concerned about this effort pretending to do something 
> that it wouldn't necessarily do.
>
> I believe we are all in agreement that terms that can come across as 
> derogatory should be avoided (if at all employed). However, avoiding 
> derogatory terms does not imply being more inclusive.
>
>
> Coming up with a definition of what we mean by diversity or 
> inclusiveness is not something that requires a lot of time -- it 
> simply requires that we acknowledge what we have in mind, and that we 
> accept that the topic has multiple axes.

   This is extremely important and something I think the group needs to 
arrive
at some consensus over. There seems to be a desire to have the group focus
(first/primarily?) on race as the single axis in which to discuss diversity
and inclusiveness, e.g. [1]-- and that would be very divisive and 
destructive.
If we want to address diversity at the IETF and foster inclusiveness then we
need to look at the issue on multiple axes. There might be something we 
could
do that would increase diversity and inclusiveness if we avoid wrapping 
ourselves
around one particular divisive axle.

   regards,

   Dan.

[1] 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/VknAFJsjSCtKNiHHUFKpX_kj608/

> FWIW, we spent less than 10 minutes in coming with this text as part 
> of draft-gont-diversity-analysis-00:
>
> ---- cut here ----
> 3.  Terminology
>
>    Throughout this document, whenever we refer to "diversity" or
>    "inclusiveness" we imply including or involving people of:
>
>    o  a range of different social and ethnic backgrounds
>
>    o  different genders
>
>    o  different sexual orientations
>
>    o  different countries and regions
>
>    o  different types of organizations (companies, non-profits, etc.)
>
>    The above list is non-exhaustive, but should make it evident that
>    "diversity" has multiple axes, and this document does not limit its
>    discussion of diversity to any particular sub-set of them.
> ---- cut here ----
>
> i.e., diversity encompasses more than one or two axes. So some of us 
> simply wanted that to be acknowledged if any claims on "diversity" 
> were going to be made, or to simply acknowledge that this effort was 
> about tackling derogatory language (as important as that may be).
>
> Thanks,

-- 
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to
escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius