[Chicago] ChiPy Organizers Meeting

Fri Feb 21 17:58:35 CET 2014

I realize with the pace this mailing list moves, I'm a bit behind and this
discussion may be winding down. I'm mostly an observer, but I'd like to
present an outsider's perspective, because I've been seeing what I feel to
be some really poor responses to the concepts of "exclusivity" and
"diversity" from all sides of the issue:

1) "Diversity isn't just about skin color and gender. I may a white male,
but I'm definitely different from other people in the group"

It's true that everyone has something that makes them stand out from the
crowd. However, several studies have been done on organizations that have
tried to increase diversity by teaching "general diversity" (i.e., we're
all special). They don't work, and actually have the opposite effect of
reinforcing the exclusivity.

Being a hobbyist versus being a professional is not the same level of
diversity as, say, being an African American or being a woman, because
hobbyists probably haven't grown up with a "hobbyist" identity their whole
lives (and dealing with all the social ramifications that shaped their
personality and the way they interact with and view the world). If you want
diversity, you actually have to recognize and target the specific
populations where you want to increase diversity.

2) "Our group is completely friendly. When I came to the group I was
totally welcomed."

First, I recommend researching the phrase "stereotype threat". When people
are reminded that they're part of the "out" group, it drastically affects
the way they act, think and perform (and also how likely they are to stick
with the activity).

What's welcoming and friendly to you, may be completely hostile to another
person. You're obviously in the group because you feel welcomed, and you're
trying to figure out why other people don't feel welcomed. The best
response is to listen to what they have to say and acknowledge that perhaps
the group has unconscious behaviors you haven't experienced.

3) "You just need to introduce yourself more."

The problem isn't shyness. It's feeling unwelcome (see problem #2). Asking
the person to introduce themselves to more people that make them feel
unwelcome is not going to improve the issue and make the person want to
come back.  To fix the problem, people who already feel welcomed need to
take the initiative in meeting newcomers, not the other way around.

This whole discussion was started because people felt the criteria for
showing up to the meeting were too exclusive, and I'm inclined to agree. I
have no "skin in the game", so to speak, because I don't live in the area
and rarely come to ChiPy. But I do have a stake in the outcome -- I stay on
the list because I have friends in the organization and I love the things I
learn from being on the list. And I do want an organization where, when I
do show up, I feel welcome to participate.

I understand wanting a base level criteria for people who are going to run
the organization. But the criteria seem to self-select for keeping more of
the same 'exclusive' behavior in the guiding principles of the
organization. Even though it was unintentional, the message sent was "We
don't want you here".

I believe that the best course of action is to open up the first several of
these meetings to whoever wants to participate, regardless of whether they
fit the criteria, and then create a group of governing members from the
people who keep showing up.  Perhaps you'll get the same group of people
you always get, who meet the exact criteria you've outlined; but perhaps
you'll get what you've actually been asking for: a broader group of people.

And now I'll go back to being a silent lurker. :D

Jen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/chicago/attachments/20140221/3019f3aa/attachment.html>