Maybe you haven't heard about `Manels'? As Gemini explains: A "manel" is a panel of professionals, often at conferences or in media, composed entirely of men. It is often seen as a failure of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), implying that women are either not qualified to contribute or that their perspectives are unnecessary.
Dear colleagues,
I’m writing to raise—yet again—an issue that many of us encounter with dispiriting regularity: conferences, workshops, and events in logic whose visible leadership is overwhelmingly male—whether in the form of all-male (or nearly all-male) invited speaker lineups, all-male program committees, or both.
I want to be explicit about scope. I am not interested in debating whether particular cases are “small,” “technical,” or “too specialized.” That line of argument is a familiar slippery slope, and in practice it serves to normalize exclusion rather than to explain it. In logic, there is no shortage of qualified women across areas. When both the speaker list and the PC skew heavily male, that reflects choices made during organization.
All-male programs and PCs are not neutral. Together, they send a clear signal about who is seen as authoritative, who is entrusted with gatekeeping roles, and who is assumed to represent the field. These signals accumulate: they shape visibility, invitations, evaluation practices, and ultimately who feels that they belong.
Organizers sometimes respond that exclusions are unintentional. That may be true—but unintentional bias is still bias, and its effects are not softened by good intentions. Organizing an event involves two clear points of intervention where effort can make a real difference:
Who is invited to speak, and
Who is asked to serve on the program committee or equivalent decision-making body.
Both are acts of curation and judgment, and both come with responsibility.
I also want to stress that this conversation is specifically about our mailing list, women-in-logic. This list is not moderated, many of us do not have the time or energy to act as moderators. But that does not mean we have to accept, circulate, or normalize calls for papers or announcements that reproduce the same exclusionary patterns we see on generic mailing lists. Setting expectations about what is acceptable here matters.
I would like to encourage two simple norms:
That we call attention—politely but explicitly—when all-male or overwhelmingly male speaker lineups or PCs are announced or promoted in our community spaces.
That diversity among both speakers and PCs be treated as a basic quality check, not an optional extra or a last-minute fix.
Speaking up can feel awkward, especially when omissions are framed as oversights. But silence signals acceptance, and acceptance ensures repetition.
If others on this list are willing to share strategies that have worked—especially around PC formation as well as speaker selection—I think that would be extremely valuable.
Best regards,
Valeria
