We try to issue the problem "as best as we can": admitting the problem, and thematizing it. We openly say how many females present in each edition and (at the end of the day) how many as public. This is not sufficient, and the counting is manual, quite imprecise, and we are not happy with it, as we have to assume »assume« their gender. Still, it seems to us that, that's the best we can do, but we are open to ideas and suggestions. (2/5)

@WtebbensWouter Tebbens ⁂ @femprocomunsCooperativa femProcomuns @rex0n

In the welcome session of we said that we have an ambivalent feeling: females participated in 6/11 talks (actually 7/12, one female speaker could not attend) which are good news in comparison to previous editions. Yet only 6 from 18 speaker were females, which is clearly bad news. We asked all the attendees to let us know what we could do differently. It's better than other years, but still a lot of work to do (3/5)
@WtebbensWouter Tebbens ⁂ @femprocomunsCooperativa femProcomuns @rex0n

0

If you have a fediverse account, you can quote this note from your own instance. Search https://mastodont.cat/users/sobtec/statuses/116159353667420173 on your instance and quote it. (Note that quoting is not supported in Mastodon.)