So an outreach program for women speakers can't address systematic discrimination -- you have to fix the conferences themselves for that. You can reach out to

So an outreach program for women speakers can't address systematic discrimination -- you have to fix the conferences themselves for that. You can reach out to more women, and invite them to apply, but it is sexist discrimination to offer women only training in public speaking on the basis that a certain group of conferences is under-represented. You would reach the same outcome, more qualified women speakers, if you offer that training to anyone who wants it. Same outcome, but one approach is sexist, and one approach is inclusive of everyone. What you are trying to do is guarantee an outcome. Some ratio of women speakers at conferences that satisfies your requirement. Approaches like that usually lead to sexism and discrimination. A better approach is to a) ensure there is an ample supply of well qualified people for your conferences and then b) encourage conferences to perform better outreach to the kinds of speakers they are seeking. Approaches like that are non-sexist and inclusive. As I said, github, an employer, should not be seen directly giving women, even non-employees, preferential treatment. If they want to donate to a women's group putting on such a workshop, that would be a different matter. Edit to add: chc, we have run out of thread reply. What is HN etiquette on that? I will say I disagree with your reply that somehow women are disadvantaged in public speaking. Having fewer women at conferences is not evidence of any disadvantage that merits a discrimination based remedy. And even if so, such a disadvantage! We're not talking job discrimination, income equality, firing policies, etc., we're talking about public speaking something that applies to very very few people across the IT world. A remedy to that does not require sexist discriminatory approaches.