Re: [boost] GNOME outreachy

Subject: Re: [boost] GNOME outreachy
From: Pranam Lashkari (plashkari628_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-25 12:30:48

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 12:31 AM Niall Douglas via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>
> Boost has always functioned as a strictly equal meritocracy. You get
> judged here completely independent of who or what you are. We, quite
> frankly, don't care so long as you can write excellent C++ and defend
> that C++ in front of everyone else here. Some long standing members here
> have pseudonyms for various personal reasons, and nobody cares.
>
> Outreachy requires orgs to practice discrimination of a form which is
> illegal in some parts of the world. I certainly could not abide by it,
> it contravenes EU human rights legislation, and I also find it morally
> wrong.
>
> I completely agree with you here. But my sole purpose of starting this
thread was to participating in this kind of open source event so that new
people get involved throughout the year and I thought GNOME outreachy would
be a good opportunity but as discussion concluded outreachy is not an event
boost would show much interest into. But there are many other events and
such one is Google Code In. (Obviously, if we have byte size tasks which
can be solved by a school student.)

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 4:05 PM degski via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

>  Although I agree on almost if not all points you make, I DO think that the
> gender angle is being (generally) approached in a far too simple way
> (dictated by political correctness). Sensible people embrace equality and
> non-discrimination, the latter being differentiating people (positively or
> negatively) on irrelevant (to the question) criteria/qualities. IMHO, many
> (most, but certainly not all) women view the world differently from men,
> and (for good or for bad) have different priorities [in life] than men. I
> think that's the main reason behind the low participation of women in C++,
> many women simply don't find C++, and/or programming in general, very
> interesting as an occupation (similarly to matchbox toy cars). When we talk
> about equality between men and women, we should not make the mistake to
> extend that to "women are, or should be, the same as men", they are not
> (that's what makes the world rather interesting actually, if I'd have to
> discuss the latest football-match with women as well, then that would be
> rather boring, I'd rather not talk about football (soccer) at all) .

> Here I believe that girls are raised differently than men and that's the
main cause of interest in different fields but maybe if we participate in
Google Code In we will have much younger contributors and if we get people
interested in C++ at a younger age maybe it can solve the problem of gender
imbalance in current C++ industry.