I’m in good company »« Zero surprises

Comments

  1. dianne says

    The list is pretty incomplete. Lots of biologists that are well worth listening to aren’t on there, for example.

  2. embertine says

    Also bluharmony, Sara Mayhew, Harriet Hall, Miranda Celeste Hale, and a number of others who have made themselves a little unpopular around here. Good list, personally Pamela Gay has to be pretty high on my wishlist of people I would like to see.

  3. ckitching says

    I’m sure someone will be here shortly to tell us how this list is somehow misandrist or otherwise sexist against men.

  4. marko says

    Wow. I’m not even sure I could list 1000 people.

    I don’t know that I could do 1000 numbers

  5. says

    From Nugent’s comments:

    Excellent list. When can we expect to see the lists of Gay, Blind, Deaf, Ethnic African, Asian, Eskimo, Aboriginal, Native American, Mentally Disabled, Physically Disabled, Bullying Victim, Traveller, Semetic [sic] and Roma Gypsy speaker lists?

    Shades of sneering “jokes” like, “We’ll have to hire a blind African-American trans-lesbian in a wheelchair so we can have enough diversity around here.”

  6. F says

    Jesus H Tapdancing Christ, yeah that comment. The one Ms. Daisy Cutter quoted. That’s seriously fucked-up. Don’t forget to include some speech-impaired speakers, lol. (Which actually isn’t much of an issue, but is the kind of crap comment I’ve seen/heard before.) And if you can find one person like the one described in the “joke”, that covers all your diversity needs, and everyone else can be a cisstraight able whiteguy. Problem solved, nyaah.

  7. crocswsocks says

    @dianne Um… did you think it was intended as a comprehensive list of all the famous women who are worth listening to?

    Anyway, Rebecca’s on it, so that’s good.

  8. Ganner says

    I need to show this list to a guy I’m debating with over at Friendly Atheist who is telling me that any form of affirmative action, any effort intended to select more women on panels would be immoral and counterproductive because it would mean leaving “more qualified” people out in favor of a diversity target. I’ve tried to get him to define how one would score ability and qualification for being a speaker. Even used you as an example, PZ, as someone who is no more qualified than plenty of other people out there but has achieved “celebrity status” and so gets invites based on it. I’ve love to see you speak, but if you were left out and someone on that list were put in, I’d hardly lose any sleep and don’t think we’d have a “less qualified” or “lower ability” cast of speakers.