Thank you for your response, I've taken an initial look at your links. The "Open Source survey" figure 3 provides insight into specific factors (as you mentioned) which women value more than men. If we can identify such factors which make any specific group unwelcome, we can try to improve them. I accept your criticism that I could've done more research to figure this out on my own. However I had hoped SE might have already identified factors like these - and can back them with data. Otherwise we can only try to 'transplant' hypotheses from studies - or conduct a new study.

@Patrick I know I was involved in a Twitter thread about that study that Julia was also involved in, so maybe they have looked at it? I think they are pretty data-oriented so I would hope so.

"That said, given that no one attacked white males, why do you think they feel so attacked and respond so defensively and loudly when the experiences and perceptions of other groups are discussed?" Because it always ends up with attacks on white males, especially conservatives.Who is capable of discriminating based on gender, when they don't know your gender? It's simply not possible.Who bans pictures on desks at work, bans same-sex couples from work does, etc? No-one.A lack of [group] does not discrimination make.Lower pull request accepts?Which ones were because of discrimination? 0?

It's not possible to have a conversation when one person defines "attack" as "ask to be somewhat self-aware of possible unintended consequences of behaviors that are not deliberately discriminatory." If you aren't going to engage in deep conversation and are going to shout at people for having a perspective different than yours it's just not interesting for me to talk. If you want to really read the articles and talk about the data I'd be very happy to, also if you want references on the experiences of LGBTQ people at work Google scholar is good for that.

@Elin You're going to find it difficult to have a conversation with anyone if you tell them they can't speak freely and then tell them you're not attacking them for telling them not to speak freely. "Because it always ends up with attacks on white males, especially conservatives." Seems to ring true with your response so far. I asked some statistical and logical questions about the assertions in your post, if you want to talk about those feel free to respond to them.

When did I say you could not speak freely? And no me critiquing your comment is not "attacks on white males, especially conservatives" or saying you can't speak your mind. If you want to say "makes me feel personally attacked" and to pick out a particular sentence, that would be something I could respond to.

Remember, for all I know, Izzy is short for Isabella, you could be South American, and you could have any kind of political views. So also please make it clear if you are talking about the feelings of a group you are part of or not.

@Elin I was referring to political attacks and if you want a large-scale example of when political attacks become physical attacks I'd cite the 2018 US presidential election. Calling people racist/sexist/whatever silences them, I'm not accusing you of doing this, but why else do you think white men and conservatives (usually) get incredibly defensive when these subjects are mentioned? Is it because all white men and conservatives are x-ist? And for the record, I did say it ends up with attacks, not that it was its self an attack.

@Elin And I'll politely refuse to tell you my race, sex, gender, sexual orientation, pronouns, etc, because that would, as you've already said, enable you to discriminate (positively or negatively) instead of properly engage. I don't care who or what you are, I care about what you're saying- and I'll assume that is what most of SE/SO does too until I see the data showing otherwise.

@apaul I'm not uncomfortable doing it, I'm proving a point. Bias is impossible if everyone's "in the closet." You told me in chat that you had biases based on people's race and sex. What's your goal here? To give everyone a level playing field, or to denounce opinions of races and sexes you don't like?

@apaul The room for improvement exists most in the people who scream about problems of which they cannot demonstrate.

@apaul No. You have not provided any evidence for anything being contested here. No-one argues that SO/SE is difficult for newbies. Only you, and people like you, think it's more difficult for 'minority groups' in spite of the complete lack of evidence.

@apaul Stop projecting your rubbish onto me. You're the one who's admitted to willing exercise race and sex based discrimination. You're not elected by some "women, people of colour, and others in marginalised groups" commission, you're a social justice warrior. Anecdotes mean nothing when you're talking about group dynamics. And pull (non)acceptances rates, again, how many were because the requester was a "woman, person of colour, etc" and not because their code was bad? you seem you seem you seem you seem you seem to not understand why I didn't find our previous conversation worth while.

@apaul "I would be a little more inclined to believe that [...] group of black people, or women" and "I took the tests. I just didn't pitch a fit when it didn't tell me what I wanted to hear." Stop being hypocritical. You're the person who is desperate to know what race and sex people are, you're the one who wants to discriminate, no-one else has your problem.

@apaul you seem to be projecting your vices onto me- stop.

@apaul I'm "implicated"? What are you talking about. You're the one who admitted having racist attitudes here. Stop talking to me you insane person.

I'm going to ask that this whole set of comments, which have nothing to do with my answer, be moved or re-moved.

Sorry about that, got a little carried away.

@Elin They probably should have been archived rather than just removed, and although I can't apologise for Apaul's behaviour- circumventing the block in chat to duke it out in comments- I should have thrown it into chat and ignored it.