[Chicago] ChiPy Organizers Meeting

[Bob Haugen]

Jennifer, that was totally awesome!

I don't participate much in Chipy any more because I moved out of
state, but I still subscribe to the list because I learn so much. But
I am also a member of several similar groups that lack diversity.

Do you think it would help to have an intro section at the beginning
of each meeting where new people could introduce themselves and the
old people could welcome them explicitly? (And then hopefully not
avoid or dismiss them thereafter?)

On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Jennifer Leadbetter
<jleadbet at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
>
>
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chicago mailing list
> Chicago at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago
>