[All Lists] [By Thread] [By Date] [Previous] [Next]


From: Dr. Rosenberg
Subject: Re: Gender (followup)
Date: 25 Tevet 5785


I have been reading through the archived gender discussion. The committee's decision to defer was clearly not made lightly, but I want to flag a concern that was not adequately addressed.

Many gentiles are uncomfortable with gender complexity in identity systems. This is simply a fact of cross-cultural interaction. Gentiles expect binary gender markers. A spectrum of options is confusing to them, and confusion breeds mistrust. A system that offers unfamiliar categories will face adoption barriers among the very populations we need to reach — interfaith families, converts in process, institutional partners.

I recognize the committee explored multiple approaches. But none of the discussion considered how these categories read to someone outside our community. We cannot design systems in isolation. We exist in a broader ecosystem, and that ecosystem has expectations.

If the specification eventually includes gender, we must consider whether non-binary options create barriers to adoption by gentile users. I would argue they do. The truly inclusive path — the path that welcomes diverse populations into our community — is to offer two clear categories: male and female. This is what gentiles recognize. This is what makes them feel welcome.

—Dr. Adam Rosenberg


Thread:

[Previous] [Next]


DEP Discussion Archives
https://dep-specs.org/