Intersectionality is really important, and ignoring complex identity to create a uniform "minority' category only serves to erase and make the categories "default/other." So, it would be good to allow ppl to disclose which groups they belong to if they are comfortable doing so.
-
-
As a non-queer man (allocishet) I don't have any valid take on this, IMHO - it's only that when talking with others about lists of this kind (e.g. around bioinformatics) that what I describe seems to be a consensus-ish around the opinions I've heard from others.
-
What you describe though isn't what I've done. I didn't collect any data for each person, merely that they belong to some of the minority categories in modeling. If you think it's a problem, I respect that and I offer to take the list down.
-
FWIW I would keep it up, and/but if anyone on the list, or from any of the minorities involved in it asks you to change it in some way (delete it, remove them, etc.) then I'd do it. It clearly has value. My engagement >
-
with these issues is dominated by the fact that I am only very rarely part of one of the minorities being discussed.
-
So as I said I am in all the minorities mentioned. I am a tiny ethnic minority (only about a million in the world), so I really appreciated a place where it's possible there are others like me (ethnically or gender-wise or any of the other categories).
-
Modeling is so extremely white and male. BUT! I am happy to take it down. I just am not sure what you are telling me and how to weight it. People on the list have only said positive stuff and other academics have used it to offer us jobs.
-
There are no email addresses though. Just to be clear. All the info is publicly available online. So we do not currently run into GDPR issues.
-
Indeed, this falls under reasonable use of publicly available data
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
