Creating a world of programming language to be inclusive as possible

I don’t want to get into the whole discussion but i think there are two things we should be mindful of:

  1. Discussing some hypothetical version of a policy that may or may nit benefit some group is not beneficial at all. On the contrary I would consider it offputing if I was a member of this group and read these comments. Especially for those who have been discriminated against or feel uncomfortable entering a community in which very few members ‘‘look like them’’.
  2. I don’t know the gender of anyone in this discussion but let’s not speak for a whole group of people (even if we feel we are members of that group but especially if not). Rather we should listen to people from underrepresented groups. From a community point of view the ethical thing is to signal that we are willing to listen and then follow through with the listening.

Yes!! Each of us represents just him-/herself

– just the same, isn’t it? Nobody would entitle any of them to represent anybody but their own person.

This topic isn’t only about gender and inclusiveness. But it seems, those have triggered something. I am genuienely interested why this is so. If you want to elaborate on it, I will listen.
Now it is.


Completely agree. The idea is that we gain ideas about what actually keeps people from joining a field/community/… and we get to improve ourselves on a case by case basis. (I think of it as kind of a bayesian update).

1 Like

I want to encourage everyone involved here to take some time to review our community standards before posting further. Please be respectful and inclusive. Asking that of our community should not be hard or divisive.

Further, to be abundantly clear, in our community we do value diversity and inclusivity.

We believe that maintaining and promoting diversity and inclusion is the only way we can have a strong and vibrant community.

This really isn’t negotiable.


If you are talking about mathematics (or more generally, STEM), then from a practical perspective there are always more slots than qualified applicants, regardless of gender. Very few people want to study mathematics, and even at large universities the 4xx and 5xx level classes will only have a handful of people.

The bottlenecks may not be at the university level: the problems start much earlier. STEM fields require foundations that are best started at a very early age, just believing that this is a feasible and enjoyable career path for someone can make a big difference. The issue is not so much about barriers than encouragement and role models.


(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

In my country most of the physicians, nurses and teachers are women. Should we throw half of them out so that there is equality?
However, there are hardly any women working in construction, mining or fishing, but they are clearly not interested in equality there.

We cannot impose artificial limitations on what everyone wants to do. Nowadays in western countries women have at least the same opportunities than men, usually more.
Many women do not like the same things than men, but that is not bad.


Opportunities may be equal (actually I don’t think so), but e.g. payment is still about 20% behind.

I think it’s really important that everyone in technology or really anywhere practices this.

There are a lot of marginalized groups in this world and yet in those groups there is also always excellence and even barring excellence, good people! Good to have a list of groups to keep in mind: Races, genders, sexes, orientations, religion, heritage, disabled people, etc. A huge host of the greatest discoveries and contributions to this world have historically been from people in one or more of these groups. Whether or not those people were recognized for it or were destroyed by brutes while alive is a different matter altogether. The list of these people is huge… I won’t copy pasta it here. But it’s more than a trend. Why? I think it’s because these people make easier targets for serious jerks…

But lately there’s been solid discussions world-wide about the broader effort, “inclusion”. Not just “stop targeting specific people/groups you biggot”. Just creating a healthy welcoming environment for all people, because it’s better that way and actually heals communities. Good buzz word is equanimity.

Jeese people can even be discriminated against for their lack of familial wealth, nonattendance to a single school/event, or degree attainment, etc. Meanwhile I’ve learned a ton from people who were dirt poor, crazy wealthy, didn’t go to school, or had serious distinctions after post doctoral studies, had severe disabilities, were healthy, were dying, were black, yellow, red, brown, and white, gay, straight, something in the middle, etc. Inclusion is paramount to growth and health of individuals and thereby communities… It’s not a “gift” or a “pitty” move, it’s literally about correcting the ills of society, the wrongs committed by others. In my opinion it’s a bare minimum expectation for conscience(Gen Z’ers seem to call those “Woke”) creatures.

But its more than a sentence on a web-page, a paragraph in a newsletter, or posts on social media that doubles as advertising(cough a business move). It’s a lifestyle commitment: to not fearing your neighbors, to raising someone up who has improved your life/project/livelihood/etc, to being okay with someone else having a good idea/contribution and that person not looking/acting/coming up the same way as you did.

Over the internet you really never know who you are working with/talking too. I speculate that this community has lots of people who need inclusion efforts and even protection…

Rules for success:
Educate. Some of those marginalized people had their scientific contributions stolen from them without accreditation, were killed, suffered career assassination, comited suicide, were condemned to live in destitute isolation and deteriorated into madness, etc. Especially in physics and math. Share their stories - the history repeats itself. Celebrate their successes publicly and condemn the injustices.
Be human. All people deserve respect. Ask instead of assume. Admit when you made mistakes. Apologize for ignorance. Speak up when someone says something marginalizing. Let the marginalized people know that it was unacceptable “face-to-face”.
Be humble. Recognize even the newest of new things that is done is a compilation of many others contributions. Work together, not against one another.
Have fun. Sharing and growing with new people is a blast. That’s really the point of all of this OSS stuff anyways right?

Where I see problems: It’s much easier to do this in a nonprofessional community. Less brutes, less stakes, and less of a group to protect at all costs. When business interests step in, you’ll pretty much always see less people speaking up for one another, sharing their minds, letting things slide, or even “targeting” the minority because its less effort than correcting the actual issues. Not to say it cannot be done, but it does require input energy to get an output result.

Two people to read about today involving this field: Alan Turing, Ada Lovelace. We’d be so far behind without them.


Please be more specific, because misleading statements like this make your point easy to attack. The uncorrected average gender pay gap is about 20% give or take (the last time I looked it up, may be slightly less today). “Payment”, the corrected pay gap, is around 5% with a huge variance from females earn more to males earn more depending on field, qualification, age, country and probably a lot more. And I think we (as a society) are doing fairly well getting rid of that part. The other 15% are more structural issues and while I’d like to discuss that, I think it’s kinda off topic here.

No, in this case I don’t want to be exact or give proof of my point.
It was adressed against:

In contrary, this statement needs be upholstered to be a good contribution to this issue. My error was to be sloppy to provoke this, I should have been direct and explicit, which I am now.
If you or anybody wants to attack my point thats ok. In which way this is misleading I do not understand.

1 Like

Should we throw half of them out so that there is equality?

First, the math on this is not even correct. Throwing half of them out will not equalize unless it is a 66%-33% distribution.

Second, I have not ever seen any proposal for affirmative action that involved firing people that were already hired. Not even inside the most radical circles.

they are clearly not interested in equality there

This generalizes all woman as they are a huge hive mind. This is offensive to me that have an aunt which life’s work is fighting for more representation in often male fields like the chemical industry.

We cannot impose artificial limitations on what everyone wants to do.

Yes, we can, those are called laws, and are widely used in all civilized world.

Nowadays in western countries women have at least the same opportunities than men, usually more.


Many women do not like the same things than men, but that is not bad.

You do not address why they do not like the same things. Do you think the difference is biological? If it is not, then it is construed by society, and therefore can be considered as artificial as laws trying to equalize the field.


I’ve heard that but never encountered any real example.
In all companies I’ve been working all man and women had the same salary.

Really? In many companies you wouldn’t even know what others make, and especially in bigger companies.

Anyway, zero salary differences for all positions and levels of experience is highly unusual, in my experience.


I really hate getting involved in arguments like this, but I can’t stand by while you say this kind of thing. This is sexist, harmful, and disparaging, and it’s an unacceptable generalization of half of humanity. This is not ok.


There’s some physical differences, particularly testosteron levels which makes males (higher levels than females) maybe more motivated than females to negociate higher revenue or to access higher social rank (I hate this expression, sorry).
Of course, this is not an excuse to pay women less than men, or prevent them from accessing to jobs, but I think we should be aware of these differences, to improve inclusion.
I don’t remember sources where I’ve got these informations, but I’ve found this study on strategies within the level of testosteron and status:
Wish you success in your inclusive community.

1 Like

Ok, folks. I realize this discussion may have been well-intentioned, but it has definitely crossed the line with multiple people making generalizations and comments that are neither founded in reality nor acceptable in our forums. Please note that this is a flagrant instance a bunch of men having a tone-deaf discussion about women while leaving no room for any actual women to chime in on the topic. This is not constructive or helpful and allowing it to continue here would actively contribute to creating a hostile and non-inclusive environment. If you want to argue about this stuff, take it to Twitter or Reddit or something.