You’re a woman invited to give a talk. The invitation includes “we are looking for a female speaker to add to our list” You react: (A) positively - they are proactively addressing the imbalance problem (B) negatively - they should invite me on merit, not gender (C) indifferently
-
can sympathize. What to suggest? Obviously ideal would be for neither labels or biases to be at play & speaking rosters to be equally populated (or however it shakes out) But on the way there: intentionally invite women but don’t mention? Mention anyway? Address only root causes?
I think my ideal is to be wanted for my thoughts or work, both of which I think warrant speaking invites! Being asked to join “as a woman” (or other identifier) has the feel that my presence does more for the organizer than they will do for me.
-
-
I know I have accepted invites where my gender was probably a factor but this went unstated. It’s hard to think of what isn’t zugzwang but I consider that within acceptable range for now.
-
Also, I don't think either objective or meritocracy really exist. Careers are built on networks, timing, and persistence.
-
This
the factors are complex and multivariable in this way.
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.