First of all the reason that I said non-white, as opposed to 'black', is because a large proportion of people who aren't white also aren't black. It's not being PC, it's being accurate, and accurate language is something which I think is very important, no matter what you are discussing.FXR wrote:I'm not blaming non white/non male people for not joining non black/ non female people in an organisation. I'm speaking about her attitude and her misdirection.pantsheadmagee wrote:I believe that the point that she's making is that the movement does have practices making it more difficult for people who are not white, and/or people who are not male, from participating equally. Again, I recommend actually reading both posts before blaming nonwhite people (not just blacks you know) and women (and of course nonwhite women) for Just Not Participating Enough.FXR wrote:Unless an organisation has rules and tangible practices preventing blacks or females from joining then she should be asking questions of the people who did'nt join instead of the people who did.
All she's complaining about is that if an organisation is made up of a certain type of people their interests naturally will tend to dominate their view. The way to cure that is to find out why the people who have not joined don't. She could level the same accusation at lesbian organisations or African Heritage Appreciation organisations. She's also talking for black people and hetrosexual women instead of to them or better still letting them talk for themselves. If more of them joined and participated there would be no problem. Asking them why they don't join might be a bit more useful I'd think. If it was written by a non white/non male person about non female/non black people it might be more insightful since the non white/non male person could provide insights into why they were put off joining the non female/non black people.
Also, in her posts she's saying a lot herself about why certain people are less likely to join. As a relatively well-known female atheist blogger, she experiences being involved in secular/atheist organisations and whatnot from that perspective. Therefore, she has herself experienced a bunch of the issues involved and has some pretty direct suggestions for how to prevent any issues that currently exist from getting any worse. Like she said- all that's required is to change the self-perpetuating cycles, and in a new movement everything's in flux anyway so that's relatively easy.
As for "if more of group-x joined and participated there'd be no problem"- well, yes! That's her point- working out how to get from a place of having organisations dominated by a particular minority (through no deliberate fault of their own!), to tweaking just a small few things so that more of underrepresented-group joined and then any problems that were there would more or less fix themselves. The problem is working out if there's any issues within groups that make them appeal specifically to a particular group, working on dealing with those issues in order to make groups more inclusive. It's all well and good to say that there would be no problem if a certain thing happened, without doing any work to actually make that thing happen, you know?