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