Fork me on GitHub

> ClojureBridge aims to increase diversity within the Clojure community by offering free, beginner-friendly Clojure programming workshops for women.


I wonder if this could/should be phrased in a more generic way? My impression so far is that ClojureBridge workshops are open to underrepresented groups in general and not strictly limited to women?


@martinklepsch: Interesting question! It's focused on women, and Sean Corfield mentioned joint workshops with groups that advocate for other underrepresented groups:


@martinklepsch: Yes, the long term goal is underrepresented groups in general but the initial focus has been on women — and those who identify as women — in particular, because it followed the model of RailsBridge. Each particular workshop should have a focus to ensure a safe space for attendees (as we’ve already seen, women respond less well to workshop run entirely by men, hence our emphasis on trying to ensure there are women TAs and, preferably at least one woman leading the teaching).


There’s a TransHack group near me, so I’d like to see a trans-focused ClojureBridge workshop here at some point — open to transmen and transwomen.


I’m sure there are other locations where ClojureBridge can leverage other local groups to organize workshops for __ {insert underrepresented group here}


@seancorfield: that sounds as if a ClojureBridge workshop should always be for one underrepresented group not multiple?


That’s my sense of what works best, yes.


But it’s definitely something you could bring up on the workshops mailing list if you have suggestions or questions.


Other folks may have strong opinions that are different to mine (and I’m no longer involved at the board level so I’m basing this off early discussions from the first year of ClojureBridge’s work).


I'm curious what problems exactly occur because some attendees will be part of multiple intersecting underrepresented groups; others will only be part of one.