Should LGBT representation and gender parity be concerns for panels?

I’m currently assembling a schedule of podcasts with a range of awesome guests. All this work is a two-fer: I publish it on Dark Matter Zine and it counts towards 45% of my grade for a subject at university.

The downside?

I have to justify my goals.

In theory that’s fine but in practice this means that I need evidence.

My draft project proposal includes aiming for gender parity (boys and girls) as well as gender diversity (LGBT representatives) for podcasts.

While I know there is some support out there on the interwebs, my ‘knowledge’ is really anecdotal with no evidence to back me up.

If you’d like some panels with gender parity and gender diversity and you want to tell Australian academic institutions that THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT please either comment on this blog, reply to a tweet or comment on my posts on facebook or googleplus.


https://twitter.com/StaceySarasvati/status/442173292686737409 

3 Comments

  1. I think its important to place diversity at the forward end of planning ie having panel/podcast organisers think – could a woman/ POC/ someone with a disability provide an important angle to a particular discussion. Which is not tokenism, its the organiser being thorough and asking themselves that question. If they can’t think of a person(s) then they might need to do a bit of legwork. If we leave panel parity to the end of the process I think there’s a temptation to quickly gather people together to do POC or Women in ….. panels to shore up overall parity. Really what we should be aiming for is integration of minorities into discussions that might not necessarily relate directly to the minority they represent ie A POC included in a discussion an character devlopment in fiction as opposed to be included in a discussion on POC in fiction, if you get the differentiation. ( and I have just realised that we are talking more about podcast panels than convention panels but I think the same holds)

Comments are closed.