Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and r

Melinda Shore <melinda(_dot_)shore(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
    > I don't, either, but as long as the IETF does, and provides a companion
    > program, I feel quite strongly that IETF travel should be equally
    > accessible to all families.

...
I think we need to think less about the companion program about being about
"vacations" for the family.  I think we should rather think about if we are
serious about supporting/encouraging young people with young families that we
need to recognize that bring the family is sometimes the right decision.

I think that you are saying this above without being explicit enough.

I tried to be gender and orientation neutral above, but let me say it again.
MEN have been historically been at liberty to go on business trips leaving their
WIVES at home with young children.  Such was life at the time.
Women with small children were forced to give up career opportunities.

If we are serious about having more gender and age diversity at the IETF we
have to recognize that bringing the infant and the supporting cast needs to
be supported.   So, when you write, "all families", I take this to mean all of:
   1) young male IETFer with mother+child in tow
   2) young female IETFer with father+child in tow
   3) young male IETFer with co-father+child in tow
   4) young female IETFer with co-mother+child in tow

Try crossing a border or going through an airport with a small child
as a single man.   Particularly if the child doesn't "look" like you
(because, genetically, the child isn't).

This is the kind of concern that I think people have.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature