I’ve been thinking a lot about women and skepticism lately, about how we can make things better. You know, more equal and whatnot. There’s something that’s been bothering me for the past few days, ever since registration opened for The Amaz!ng Meeting 6. I considered holding onto it until my talk next Saturday in New York, but I’d rather get it out there, feel a lot better, and give you a preview of what will probably become a slide during my talk. So here goes: WHERE THE HELL ARE ALL THE FEMALE SPEAKERS? Further ranting and illuminating pie charts after the jump . . .
That’s right, 18 speakers and only one woman: Sharon Begley, science correspondent for the Wall Street Journal. Hooray that we have Sharon, but boooooo that we have no one else. We have no Genie Scott, no Carolyn Porco, no Kari Byron, no Julia Sweeney. No Jennifer Ouellette or Tara Smith or Ayaan Hirsi Ali or Mary Roach. And don’t even get me started on the lack of transsexuals. Which I spelled wrong in the chart, that’s how upset I am. Blinded with rage.
Here are two (2!) calls to action for you, dear reader. You may choose one, the other, both, or neither.
1.) Comment below with the name of a skeptical woman you’d like to see at an Amaz!ng Meeting. Either we’ll work to get them included in TAM7 or we’ll just throw our own damned conference.
2.) Apply (or encourage a female friend to apply) to give a paper presentation Sunday at TAM6. Ray Hall has just announced the call for papers, and he has been fairly consistent in choosing people who are interesting and well-spoken with fresh new ideas. Like, you know, me. Or Robert Lancaster, or Dr. Harriet Hall! Every year after the papers, pretty much everyone agrees that they’re the highlight of the conference. If that’s where we have to get some diversity, so be it. Click here for more info.
Oh, and just for good measure:
Need a chaser for that rant? Go back and watch The Godless Girl, then read one of the funniest comment threads ever. Don’t high-hat my monkey.