On 2024/04/26 15:35, Jonas Schäfer wrote:
<snip>
One can always
come up with more categories of marginalized people, and
trying to enumerate all of them in a CoC is IMO impractical, while
mentioning only some of them can create the impression that some
categories of people are "more equal" than others.
They are though, or
should be anyway. People from marginalized groups are just
that, marginalized. We as an organisation should do the extra effort to
support individuals from these groups in order to allow them to be safe in our
spaces, to live up to their potential and what they'd like to achieve and
contribute.
You're basically advocating for so-called positive discrimination (aka
affirmative action), which is a political position advocated for by
certain political groupings.
I'm on record from previous discussions in saying that I don't think a
supposedly neutral standards organization should be instrumentalized for
the furtherance of political programmes.
At the end of
the day, the tiniest minority is the individual, and
requiring that we treat each individual with respect and courtesy is
enough, without having to refer to specific (sometimes politically
charged) categories.
Could you clarify "sometimes politically charged"?
There are politically contentious topics surrounding what constitutes
marginalized identities and how one (and society) should go about
accommodating them.
We're running the risk if introducing these politically divisive topics
into the XSF, thereby politicizing the organization which will likely
introduce the same divisiveness, acrimony and bitterness that
characterizes political debates. I don't think this benefits the
organization or aids in the furtherance of standards development.
JC