Paul Graham may not be a sexist, but now is the time for him to use his leadership position to nudge the tech world towards gender equality. There’s one action he could take right now, at essentially no personal cost or risk, that would have a modest but visible effect.
An article from January 2013, argues that men should refuse to speak on panels where women are not represented. One can imagine different variants of this principle, but here’s one possibility: “Because women account for roughly 20% of the tech world, I won’t speak on an all-male panel with four or more participants.”
Let’s imagine Paul Graham tells a conference organizer: “I’d love to be on your panel, but you’ll need to include at least one female speaker.” Considering Paul Graham’s status and the value he would bring to a conference, organizers will presumably find a way to make it happen. Although they’d be willing to go to great lengths to recruit a female speaker and secure Paul Graham’s attendance, they probably wouldn’t have to. Being on a panel alongside Paul Graham would make it an attractive gig for just about everyone in tech, male and female. There won’t be a shortage of eager applicants.
Finding qualified women won’t be hard, either. The tech world is pretty big nowadays, and with 20% of it being female, there’s bound to be at least one woman who’s qualified to speak—at least on any topic significant enough that Paul Graham would attend a conference about it. Even in the unlikely occurrence that the organizers have trouble finding someone, Paul Graham could offer to shoot them a few names, or even just tweet about it and let the panelists come to him. He’s been vocal about the fact that he knows quite a few impressive women in tech, and he’d meet quite a few more if he put the word out.
Besides the symbolic value of this gesture and the impact on the conferences Paul Graham actually attends, there would be cascade effects throughout the conference landscape. If it’s publicly known that Paul Graham will not speak on all-male panels, conferences will invite more women to present, in the hopes of securing his presence. Even when Paul Graham declines to attend a conference, the organizers won’t un-invite these women, leading to increased representation on a much larger scale.
It’s obvious that Paul Graham could do this, but why should he? It’s not just because it would be helpful. There are countless worthy causes to which any person could conceivably devote their efforts. We can’t expect everyone to advocate for every issue.
The reason is that Paul Graham stepped into the conversation, even if accidentally. Now that he’s done so, inaction can be perceived as a statement in itself. Even if his views are entirely progressive, people who look up to him might get the wrong idea. By choice, he’s a leader in the tech community, and that comes with some responsibility. It doesn’t fall on him to offer the definitive solution to the gender gap. But when he can take one easy, risk-free action that’s almost certain to have a modest but positive effect, why wouldn’t he?