Re: Content Usable pronouns and Tal

Hi Lisa,

You have just argued for why this one instance should be removed from the
document.

If, as you say, "...it is not known to many people..." then why are we
adding it? You cannot have both the "we need to support diversity"
argument, and the "not everyone understands this" argument at the same
time. In other words, if stating this for all (or at least more than one)
persona(s) is confusing, then surely adding it to only ONE persona is
equally if not MORE confusing... ("why are they saying this about only this
persona? Is '*gender identity disorder*' a medical condition and part of
their disability?" - see comments about Iran below.)

I've had my reservations about our documents trying to be all things for
all people in the past, and I continue to maintain that this is getting out
of scope for the goal of this document, which is to focus on the needs
of *users
with cognitive disabilities*.

If we are insisting on using this as a learning opportunity to address
other social inequalities, fine (and I was prepared to back down slightly),
but do so in a way that does not promote tokenism, which I argue today that
is *EXACTLY* what is happening here. Your latest argument that this can be
confusing for some users (the *impacted audience*) is the final
justification against adding this content.

To recap, I am opposed to advancing this for the following reasons:

   - *Concerns related to internationalization/translation:* some languages
   are gender neutral, and this is going to cause translation problems (I have
   previously cited Chinese, and note that this past week W3C contact Ivan
   Herman remarked that Hungarian has no gendered pronouns either:
   https://www.facebook.com/ivan.herman/posts/10158993478418828 -
   apparently this is true for Finnish as well.)

   - *Concerns related to cultural norms and laws:* I have previously cited
   the 2013 Russian gay propaganda law ("for the Purpose of Protecting
   Children from Information Advocating for a Denial of Traditional Family
   Values"), and how adding this editorial content MAY run afoul of that
   legislation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_gay_propaganda_law).
   This legislation "... prohibit(s) the distribution of "*propaganda of
   non-traditional sexual relationships*" among minors."
   In Iran, the current policy is that Trans persons are not "thought of as
   deviants", but as having *a medical illness* (gender identity disorder)
   with a cure (sex reassignment surgery). This may be a moot point however,
   as in Iran, the government heavily censors material available on the
   internet (a 2013 analysis found that nearly half of the 500 most popular
   sites on the internet are blacklisted in Iran) and Trans people cannot
   research what it means to be transgender or connect with others in the
   community.  (source:
   https://qz.com/889548/everyone-treated-me-like-a-saint-in-iran-theres-only-one-way-to-survive-as-a-transgender-person/)
   Q: what will this do to our document for Iran/Iranians?

   - *Concerns related to comprehension and purpose:* According to our own
   internal COGA Task Force, "... it is not known to many people, and we want
   to minimize learning new things..." - that adding this pronoun information
   is adding an additional learning burden to the COGA community (according to
   the experts) and may detract from the purpose of this document.

Given that any one of these could be significant, and that likely adding
all three together even more so, I believe we are over-shooting our mark
here and advocate for the removal of this particular labeling from the Tal
persona.  I will now formally oppose the publication of this document AS
IT IS CURRENTLY written for these reasons.

Sincerely,

JF

On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 5:51 AM Lisa Seeman <lisa1seeman@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi John,
> Coga thought about this, but did not like adding it to every persona as it
> is not known to many people, and we want to minimize learning new things to
> understand this content.
> Having a sentence in one persona is compromise that we felt we can do.
> people often come sentence a sense that they are not sure what it is about,
> but if they understand the rest of it, they are ok.
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 7:23 PM John Foliot <john@foliot.ca> wrote:
>
>> Hi Rain,
>>
>> Thanks for this research!! It is quite interesting.
>>
>> As an additional "option" (consideration?), if we *DO* continue to
>> include the statement that Tal prefers to be identified as they/them/their,
>> what if we include this for *all* of the personas: make it a standard bit
>> of information about all of the personas, not just the one. I think that
>> would help a little in reducing my impression of 'tokenism' ("Look, we've
>> got one of those too!" - yes, that comes off as insensitive, and I do not
>> mean it that way - it's simply an observation that it could be
>> interpreted that way).
>>
>> I also continue to be concerned about cultural sensitivity - not every
>> culture is as accepting of gender diversity as our increasingly secular
>> Western society, and I believe we need to be mindful of that as well.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> JF
>>
>> (Related: editorial note - the text currently reads "Tal like to be
>> referred to (pronouns) as they/them/theirs" - should it not be "Tal like
>> *s* to be referred to (pronouns) as Tal/they/them/theirs" - i.e.the
>> addition of the "s" on "like")
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 12:26 PM Rain Michaels <rainb@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I'm hoping that my comments below don't further complicate or confuse
>>> this conversation, but after reading the conversation that followed, I
>>> connected directly with a researcher who has done a lot of work around the
>>> intersection of cognitive and gender diversity in order to better
>>> understand how important it is that we include a non-binary persona.
>>>
>>> This researcher confirmed the following:
>>>
>>>    - Choosing to use one's name instead of a pronoun (as Rachael
>>>    proposed in option 3) is an approach that will be recognized and
>>>    appreciated by the community we are trying to include, as it is both a
>>>    personal preference, and also a self-protective preference that offers more
>>>    subtly.
>>>    - There is a higher than average prevalence of individuals with
>>>    cognitive difference also identifying as non-binary; these individuals are
>>>    left out in so many ways that it would be a small and positive gesture for
>>>    us to include them in the Tal persona.
>>>    - A good resource to help think of the importance of this single
>>>    move: Gender Dysphoria and People with Intellectual Disability
>>>    <http://www.intellectualdisability.info/mental-health/articles/gender-dysphoria-and-people-with-intellectual-disability>
>>>
>>>
>>> Additionally, given the link to the emerging style recommendation from
>>> EOWG that Laura referenced
>>> <https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Style#Personas_and_use_cases>, and
>>> given that we do have many personas, including Tal as a non-binary
>>> individual who prefers to be referred to by name feels like an important
>>> thing for us to do.
>>>
>>> Rain
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 11:24 AM Laura Carlson <
>>> laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Rachael and all,
>>>>
>>>> I prefer option 1 and 3 combined.
>>>>
>>>> If specifying pronouns in our personas is going to help to promote
>>>> diversity, equality, and inclusiveness, we should be doing it.
>>>>
>>>> It seems like the Education & Outreach Working Group (EOWG) may be
>>>> working on persona pronouns for the WAI Style Guide:
>>>> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Style#Personas_and_use_cases
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps Shawn may have some guidance for us?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>>
>>>> Kind Regards,
>>>> Laura
>>>>
>>>> On 3/23/21, Rachael Bradley Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Hello,
>>>> >
>>>> > Thank you for the thoughtful discussion at today's meeting about the
>>>> plural
>>>> > pronoun used in Tal. A resource you can read if this is a new area
>>>> for you
>>>> > is https://www.mypronouns.org/
>>>> >
>>>> > We discussed the following options:
>>>> >
>>>> >    1. no change
>>>> >    2. add it in 1 or 2 places in the main persona
>>>> >    3. Tal like to be referred to (pronouns) as Tal/they/them/theirs
>>>> >    4. change the persona to remove gender diversity
>>>> >    5. use the pronouns as frequently as would be used naturally
>>>> >
>>>> > COGA had voted against 5 because of readability and translatability
>>>> > challenges and compromised with using the minimal pronouns in option
>>>> 1.  I
>>>> > have created a google document with all of the options at
>>>> >
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/18FabK-X1AgOMPqG2YydOrcyl1d89rHxbcfqso2du1vo/edit#
>>>> >
>>>> > Please take a look and weigh in with your thoughts on how to proceed.
>>>> >
>>>> > Best regards,
>>>> >
>>>> > Rachael
>>>> > --
>>>> > Rachael Montgomery, PhD
>>>> > Director, Accessible Community
>>>> > rachael@accessiblecommunity.org
>>>> >
>>>> > "I will paint this day with laughter;
>>>> > I will frame this night in song."
>>>> >  - Og Mandino
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Laura L. Carlson
>>>>
>>>>