[Owasp-leaders] don't allow explicit discrimination 🙏🏿 (women only)

Takaharu Ogasa takaharu.ogasa at owasp.org
Wed Mar 20 06:13:07 UTC 2019


I agree with bil.
We are the open community and as a chapter leader, I always think about
including everyone show up at the meeting and making best effort everyone
feels they are equally included.
Maybe consider taking questions through the chat service or such
anonymously if it is hard to ask questions? Otherwise do the same track at
same time but privide women's only room or womens section attached with
some female mentors to support? I am male but I always feels the same as
English is my second language and not really sure the queation I am about
to through is on-track question or not, so hesitate to ask is very common
problem for me too.

PS I totally understand the effort to open wide and provide first step for
women (or minority) to get involved in the community and with that
perspective I am with you guys.

--
Takaharu Ogasa (@takaharuogasa)
OWASP Sendai Local Chapter Leader
OWASP A&D Project Leader
https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Sendai


On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 3:14 AM Timur 'x' Khrotko [owasp] <timur at owasp.org>
wrote:

> Bil, thank you for the objective view on the case and the answer which
> exactly matches my request/issue!
>
> Avi, Vandana, could you please consider the change of the condition to
> 'women-focused' as Abhi and Bil suggested? And also "making it clear in the
> description that it's being offered by WIA" as a bonus (to indicate that
> the training was not part of the CfT competition), please!
>
> Please also note that most of the below discussion was a detour from the
> original issue which is the 'women only' condition/label. I got my takeaway
> regarding the broader topic of attracting more women to participate at the
> secdev training events. I will also raise separately the issue of
> regulating the announcement of free trainings offered for whatever reasons
> in parallel with the CfT. And I would formulate the need to attract more
> developers by targeting specific groups or strata.
>
> x
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 6:46 PM Bil Corry <bil.corry at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> Thank you Timur for raising this issue.  This training is being offered
>> by the Women in AppSec (WIA) Committee, which is officially charted by
>> OWASP to "develop leadership, promote active membership and participation,
>> and contributions by women in application security professional
>> communities, globally and locally."
>>
>> The training itself conforms within their charter, however, it should
>> probably be labeled as "Women Focused" rather than "Woman Only" as both
>> Vandana and Avi have said men can sign up for it.  I'd also suggest making
>> it clear in the description that it's being offered by WIA.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> - Bil
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 9:32 PM Timur 'x' Khrotko [owasp] <
>> timur at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Board, dear Josh,
>>>
>>> please modify the conditions of the Burp/ZAP training announced at
>>> Appsec Global in Tel Aviv. The "women only" condition is gender
>>> discriminatory, that is just plainly discriminatory and as such contradicts
>>> the faith and probably the policies of OWASP. Also it contradicted the
>>> training review policy which promised to make choices solely on
>>> professional grounds.
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I understand the idea behind it and I support the WIA initiative but
>>> there must be common sense limits. You shouldn't encourage black only
>>> tailor shops in your holy fight with racially discriminatory tailor shops.
>>>
>>> There're options to keep the idea, maybe make the training free for WIA
>>> members -- that would be against my taste still but maybe something
>>> tolerable. Or let WIA invent a clever and tasteful solution for the
>>> conditions of a free training to engage female devs in secdev.
>>>
>>> As far as I know this isn't an issue with the Tel Aviv organisers as
>>> this training was nested from above. And also this women only thing already
>>> happened at one of the previous conferences, in the US probably.
>>>
>>> Consider that when one inserts trainings for political reasons then
>>> similar trainings which could compete on professional grounds get
>>> automatically excluded. So by promoting causes which are not exactly the
>>> core causes OWASP exists for one harms the professional impartiality/etc.
>>>
>>> Satirical sidenote: I'm not afraid of being tagged as trumpist since I'm
>>> already a Russian troll 😀 And during the Samantha-gate I already accepted
>>> highbrow American comments that we don't know modern social/moral norms at
>>> this side of the world.
>>>
>>> Or would it be a good move next time to announce a 'Muslims only', 'Jews
>>> only', 'childfree only' or a 'gay only' training next time? (I subscribe to
>>> support all these causes and peoples sometimes discriminated -- even in my
>>> OWASP hat but not in a discriminatory way.)
>>>
>>> Your thoughts?
>>>
>>> Current reference: https://telaviv.appsecglobal.org/registration/
>>>
>>> Timur
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>>
>>
>> This message may contain confidential information - you should handle it
>> accordingly.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20190320/fa92b0eb/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list