From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom9=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Wed Jun 3 23:07:48 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom9 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom9@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 9326A9DB194; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 23:07:48 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from ppa02.jpl.nasa.gov (ppa02.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.137.113]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A0029DB193 for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 23:07:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pps.filterd (ppa02.jpl.nasa.gov [127.0.0.1]) by ppa02.jpl.nasa.gov (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 053L0IYb184995 for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 14:07:44 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jpl.nasa.gov; h=message-id : subject : from : to : date : content-type : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding; s=InSight1906; bh=4u8C56Da1sET77qq0lQzZafNXUoR6twh0B6zDESIYcI=; b=m+Kg0EqcBZSOiP0gOhnEQNGncYao7qlAzH4JOfCHD3nvqMlYunDOmCUrOsxBWz3YHhhz QskmP08hZdJY4UUlTSh4WX3o+Ud813n+f1TQWzhHVmfPZWj7KyJUvTC/BRO+ZM1aAKGU kmaYluJ1pvAaZ2koYNtSh+HuwIg+UjlNQbwrGzHbUkB0DX1/MaQZTWePLCPFUy8lesYk fCboOIUxh2CNsgPutJrL3nWm1FwwraSrOEH9FHyiQc3EkqwSOIoYpKV1u21qlpUjSRfe epdrq1gXmSO19dGwJyC8iWq9xpqhRHryzSen/3+38FQJ9/oFoBbhTfwDUSrh+KONLfVd 4Q== Received: from mail.jpl.nasa.gov (altphysenclup03.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.137.120]) by ppa02.jpl.nasa.gov with ESMTP id 31bpns2k18-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 03 Jun 2020 14:07:44 -0700 Received: from van.vsnyder (097-090-007-013.res.spectrum.com [97.90.7.13]) (authenticated (0 bits)) by smtp.jpl.nasa.gov (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id 053L7hHO028668 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256 bits) verified NO) for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 14:07:44 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: [Re: (SC22WG5.6222) Fwd: [SC22] ISO Gender Action Plan Survey] From: Van Snyder To: sc22wg5 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2020 14:07:42 -0700 Organization: Caltech Jet Propulsion Laboratory Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5-1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-IP: 097-090-007-013.res.spectrum.com [97.90.7.13] X-Source-Sender: van.snyder@jpl.nasa.gov X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.216,18.0.687 definitions=2020-06-03_13:2020-06-02,2020-06-03 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=2 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=882 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2004280000 definitions=main-2006030161 Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk Brian Friesen bfriesen at lbl.gov Tue Jun 2 17:45:16 EDT 2020 wrote Gender imbalance in computer science and other STEM fields has been studied in enormous depth... there is a wealth of information which can help us to understand it in more detail. Bill Long longb at cray.com Tue Jun 2 18:25:30 EDT 2020 wrote Brian is right that the issue of few women in the computer field has been studied exhaustively. While the WG5 effort is good- intentioned, I fear it is focused at the wrong end of the career pipeline. So it's not obvious why UN/ISO need J3 and WG5 to waste our time to study it in further detail. Perhaps ISO should study the existing in- depth studies instead of doing yet another one. These pointless and repetitive studies might be part of the reason that ISO standards are so expensive. If ISO stuck to standards instead of thought policing, maybe their overhead would be lower. My remark that the survey is absurdly irrelevant politics follows from an observation that the only reason for such surveys is an asssumption that "inadequate" diversity is somehow the fault of everybody who isn't sufficiently diverse. I find that proposition intensely offensive. "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" Gender diversity (or the lack thereof) is not the collective fault of WG5 or individually of every WG5 member -- unless you're one who believes that every social evil implies collective instead of individual guilt. Any individual who opposes any kind of diversity can rightly be castigated. Any group that opposes any kind of diversity as a matter of policy can rightly be castigated. But I don't oppose diversity, and wouldn't join a group that does. Assuming everybody is at fault is profoundly offensive. It's not my fault that primary school teachers who don't have any knowledge or understanding of science, technology, engineering or mathematics start at a very early age to convince minority and female children that "STEM are anti-social, and even if they aren't, they're too hard for you." I observed this first- hand with my own daughters, and my friends' neighbors', and colleagues' children. This starts in our schools of education. My son-in-law had to take a Master's Degree in education to get a certificate in the county where he teaches. He calls it a "Master's Degree in Drivel." That's where UN/ISO should start if they really believe it's their responsibility to address the problem. That's where I started, with my local school board and PTA, and the California State Superintendent of Public Instruction (whose daughter was in my Russian class in 1963). Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash brycelelbach at gmail.com Tue Jun 2 21:13:02 EDT 2020 wrote I also want to make this clear: comments like this are not acceptable. Thought police are not acceptable anywhere. If Bryce really believes that thought policing is important, perhaps a career move from SC22 to a twitter or facebook censorship position would be in order. Fortunately, the WG5 mailing list does not yet have a censor.