[J3] [EXTERNAL] (SC22WG5.6222) Fwd: [SC22] ISO Gender Action Plan Survey

[Keith Bierman]

I did not mean to imply it was sufficient. However, "back in the day" there
was more gender diversity on the committee ... with a single exception
(which I am loathe to discuss online) I don't know of any adverse
pressure applied to those members and the outreach for new members was
largely driven by Leadership (Chair and IR were female when I started).
That the number of women on the committee has fallen is an observable fact.
I have no information as to what factors have driven it.
Keith Bierman
khbkhb at gmail.com
303 997 2749


On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 3:03 PM Damian Rouson <damian at sourceryinstitute.org>
wrote:

> “Not turning away” is not sufficient.  If it were, then any number of
> deeply troubling imbalances that exist today would have been resolved by
> now.  They haven’t been and any attempt to even get the smallest amount of
> data relevant to the problem gets publicly ridiculed as “absurdly
> irrelevant.”  Again... stunning.
>
> Damian
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 13:53 Keith Bierman via J3 <
> j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:
>
>> FWIW, the committee used to have several women, including the leadership
>> (J. Adams, J. Martin) and various vendor reps (IBM and Cray come to mind
>> with just a few seconds of walking down memory lane).  While 4 may not seem
>> like a lot, we were often only a dozen or members so it wasn't trivial
>> (although not parity). As far as I know, no member candidate was ever
>> turned away on the basis of gender (or any other category other than
>> running afoul of the company limits).
>> Keith Bierman
>> khbkhb at gmail.com
>> 303 997 2749
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20200602/aeae13b0/attachment.htm>