I actually really like that amendment. I'd change it to allow for the opposite to hold true though (if the nominees were all women, we bump a man into the pool as well) - I don't think any of us seriously expect that to be required in the immediate future, but I think it would balance the amendment and possibly give it traction with some of the stick-in-the-mud regular business meeting voters.
I thought it was fascinating - and all the responses to it as well are interesting. People bring so much to this sort of discussion, and there's no real way to see clearly.
I agree, I think that it should be slated the way you suggested, so that it's an issue for every one to consider, and it's not biased towards either sex - it just happens that the water the Hugos are swimming in are unthinkingly and inherently slated towards males.
But OMG what trouble makers LOL Cheryl was pretty cool when I met her, and yes, TOTAL TROUBLEMAKER. :-)
no subject
Date: 2009-08-26 02:18 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2009-08-26 02:22 am (UTC)From:I agree, I think that it should be slated the way you suggested, so that it's an issue for every one to consider, and it's not biased towards either sex - it just happens that the water the Hugos are swimming in are unthinkingly and inherently slated towards males.
But OMG what trouble makers LOL
Cheryl was pretty cool when I met her, and yes, TOTAL TROUBLEMAKER.
:-)
no subject
Date: 2009-08-26 02:24 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2009-08-26 02:34 am (UTC)From::-)