This is interesting. The article was extremely insightful regarding research into where the problems were and what needed more research.
> The problem is that if your audience is potentially "all humans", the ratio is 50/50.
This is true but the question is not so much whether certain roles are primarily male or female but whether you have just enough of both and a lot of participation on various ways from both.
I.e. if your engineering team is 90% male but your testing team is 90% female I don't think you are going to have a feedback problem.....
Regarding intent and labels like "sexist" (or "racist" etc). I think you are right on. I think we do this because it allows an assignment of personal responsibility, while if we accept that intent is really not that relevant, then we have to accept that we all have a hand to play in problems.
> The problem is that if your audience is potentially "all humans", the ratio is 50/50.
This is true but the question is not so much whether certain roles are primarily male or female but whether you have just enough of both and a lot of participation on various ways from both.
I.e. if your engineering team is 90% male but your testing team is 90% female I don't think you are going to have a feedback problem.....
Regarding intent and labels like "sexist" (or "racist" etc). I think you are right on. I think we do this because it allows an assignment of personal responsibility, while if we accept that intent is really not that relevant, then we have to accept that we all have a hand to play in problems.