On 06/19/2013 11:31 AM, Melinda Shore wrote:
On 6/19/13 10:16 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
It's not clear to me how this example relates to the IETF.
Even in fields in which the overwhelming majority of
practitioners, the majority of people in leadership or
management positions are men.
So again, it's not at all clear how that relates to the IETF (given that
we don't fall into the category of "the overwhelming majority of
practitioners [are women]."
To be clear, I'm not trying to be critical of your point, I'm simply
asking you to compare apples to apples.
Everybody's got good
intentions - I'd be very surprised if anybody is sitting
around consciously thinking that women are less capable
of doing a good job in management than men. But you
end up with some disturbing trends in aggregate. Meaning
well really is not enough, and as I said my expectation
is that we'll get a few cycles of trying to be more
balanced but we won't get institutional change that would
inhibit backsliding.
Yes, you've made the point rather amply that you think there is an
institutional problem with lack of women in leadership roles _in the
IETF_. My experience has been considerably different however, and as a
result I find it hard to accept your premise unconditionally. At this
moment in time I think it's correct to say that women are
underrepresented, but I don't think it's proven yet that this represents
any kind of institutional bias.
I look at women like Leslie Daigle, Allison Mankin, Margaret Wasserman,
Lynn St. Amour, Joyce Reynolds ... those are just off the top of my
head; certainly not my intention to slight anyone ... all of whom have
now, or have had significant leadership roles, and made lasting impacts
on the IETF both in its work product and culture.
Can we (and should we) do better? Absolutely. I would love to see more
participation by different groups, nationalities, genders, etc. And I
have a vested interest here. I have a daughter who is smart as a whip,
and when it comes time for her to find a job I want to be sure that
every door is open to her.
But I also think it's possible for us to agree that we have room to
improve without constantly banging the drum that we have a deep-seated
institutional bias, especially when that point is far from proven.
... and while we're on that topic, what are you doing to help?
That is truly an unfortunate line of argument, and I hope
you don't use it very often.
It's not a "line of argument," it's a legitimate question. Others have
described their actions to help improve the situation, which hopefully
still others can latch onto and emulate. You bring a unique perspective
to the table, so I'm hoping that you can describe what you're doing to
help solve the problem so that others can emulate your example.
Doug