Gender diversity at web conferences

Thanks for the link! That was a very interesting post and comment discussion.

Liza
Founder & Coordinator, LesbianFamily.org ( http://www.lesbianfamily.org/ )
Personal Blog, LizaWasHere ( http://www.lizawashere.com/ )

You might be interested in Anne 2.0: Working with the Architecture of the Space ( http://annezelenka.com/2007/02/working-with-the-ar... ). She had some reflections on blogging by women today.

http://www.webteacher.ws/
http://first50.wordpress.com/

I agree that there is, and should be, a greater concern for having women in visible, leadership roles in tech conferences and otherwise in the tech community.

I also think that in order to develop pools of future leaders in those roles, we need to make sure that women are engaged members of the community. If we're failing there, I think we'll keep failing further up the food chain. But I haven't seen any statistics either; my evidence is purely anecdotal.

Liza
Founder & Coordinator, LesbianFamily.org ( http://www.lesbianfamily.org/ )
Personal Blog, LizaWasHere ( http://www.lizawashere.com/ )

I don't know the statistic on the number of female vs. male bloggers. One study ( http://www.mediareporttowomen.com/statistics.htm ) found equal numbers of men and women use the internet, but it doesn't break it down into who has a blog. Have you seen any figures on that? It would be interesting to know.

The statistics that seem to alarm people over and over again are the number of female faces behind the microphones at tech conferences.

http://www.webteacher.ws/
http://first50.wordpress.com/

Thanks for speaking up on this issue, Steph. For the past several years this recurring issue has stayed mainly on the percentage of women. But some of the commenters this time around were bringing in other points, perhaps in hopes of bolstering their position. Anil Dash wants to make a point about a lack of diversity in the tech industry in general. Ben Henick's post at WaSP dragged the argument into the web standards arena. And Shelly Powers says that the tech industry in general is "broken." Does she mean world wide and for non-Anglo cultures? Based on what you said, it seems to apply.

Each time this comes up it seems to me that it grows bigger and louder. I hope that soon the noise will make a difference.

I made a public pledge on Web Teacher ( http://www.webteacher.ws/2007/02/i-decided-to-quit... ) to do my part in creating the change I wish to see in the world by coming out of my hidey-hole and trying to speak in and write for venues where I don't normally tread.

http://www.webteacher.ws/
http://first50.wordpress.com/

As a woman in tech whose actual ethnic origins stem from a cascade of minorities, I actually don't feel it is really all that fair to be using the term "diversity" for this discussion. There are two issues here: that of not enough women speaking/participating at conferences, and the lack of representation of non-white participants.

First and foremost, the issue at hand should be about women — hello, we make up just about the other half of the world. Why we are not well-represented in tech is certainly wrought with social causes but I'm not content with having this being played down as an issue conveniently lumped under "diversity", and especially not in the same breath with ethnicity. (Btw, have you noticed that all these posts have been in English, as were the conferences in question, and maybe that could be a reason why?)

It is very easy to define "the other" under the one umbrella. If I am brave enough to make a bet, I will be willing to wager that there are not enough women in tech all over the world, and in every non-Anglo culture where tech is certainly rife.

By treating these issues as the same problem, we're not giving either of them enough weight, nor would we be able to really view them individually with clarity and hence address them accordingly in their own right.

-- Stephanie Troeth

This is such an interesting and frustrating topic. I love the way that I've been able to connect with people through my blog and their blogs, and most of the people with whom I've connected have been women.

Yet, it's clear that this is a significant and real issue, at all layers of the blogosphere.

For example, my company -- for whom I am NOT speaking -- recently launched a voluntary employee blogroll ( http://blogs.earthlink.net/directory.php ), linked from our official ( http://blogs.earthlink.net/ ) corporate blog. Of the 14 "inaugural" blogs, my personal blog is the only one written by a woman.

Today, we had a lunchtime "Blogging Boot Camp ( http://blogs.earthlink.net/2007/02/hello_fellow_bl... )," where roughly 25% of the attendees were women. When the final question of the session was asked, "How many of you are turned off of blogging completely?" only one person raised her hand. Yup. Her hand.

Now, I do not think my company is discouraging women from participating in these kinds of projects. I think they would love to have a more balanced blogroll. And I think if there were something obvious to do to "fix this" they would do it. (Although interestingly, all of the speakers at both boot camp sessions have been men. Maybe I need to do a mini BlogHer internally.)

What are the factors that are failing to draw women into the blogging community as active participants? Are we more concerned about our privacy than men? More worried about the consequences of the long-term searchability of blogs and the Internet? (A quick glance through Facebook and MySpace suggests not.)

I'd love to hear what others think.

Liza
Founder & Coordinator, LesbianFamily.org ( http://www.lesbianfamily.org/ )
Personal Blog, LizaWasHere ( http://www.lizawashere.com/ )

Eric Meyer posted this comment on my Web Teacher blog. I thought I'd add it here in his behalf:

Hi, Virginia. Thanks for your comments and thoughts. I would've posted this over at BlogHer but I don't have an account there, and this probably isn't the best time for me to obtain one.

So I want to say two things. One, I feel like what I originally said was badly misinterpreted by a number of people. You may be among them. I was saying in my original post that I strive to be and essentially am blind to gender, ethnicity, skin tone, sexual orientation, religion, handedness, and a whole slew of other categories-- not just in daily life, but when I pick speakers.

Somehow, that's been taken as me saying that only white men are qualified to be speakers, that the old boy club is just fine. I said almost the exact opposite. Most commenters have understood that, but not everyone. For that, I apologize, because the way I wrote about the topic allowed that misunderstanding to happen. But it bothers me that a number people I respect-- and you are among them-- took away a different message, a message almost completely antithetical to what I said and what I believe.

Two, my "thinking again" post may not be the kind of thinking again you think it is. I could not possibly have captured everything I thought and felt in a book, let alone a post. Everything I said in that post is utter (occasionally raw) truth. It's just ambiguous, and a lot of people are seeing things in it that aren't so.

There would be irony there, except with the second post, I knew that would be the case. It was a necessary catharsis anyway.

I hope that, among those who have been upset and disappointed by my original post, I will have the chance to continue to converse, and to have us all learn by that conversation.

http://www.webteacher.ws/
http://first50.wordpress.com/