I agree. That must be an energy-consuming effort. For a man, it is naturally more profitable to compete for resources with only 50% of the world’s population. It makes no logical sense to include the other 50%. This has to be about a higher perspective and not a selfish or adversarial game, and it won’t come without conflict.

Perhaps the ecosystem will need targeted financial incentives to include women at first until everyone is properly socialized and accustomed to it—until new generations of developers lose touch with the fact that there was once a war against women in the Bitcoin development ecosystem.

More on this, and open to peer review: https://scalarschool.medium.com/the-onion-model-for-bitcoin-open-source-development-7d7dc07ce479

As an activist committed to promoting gender parity in Bitcoin developer communities and facing extreme retaliation, I've observed a persistent reluctance and denial within the open-source community to confront how technical expertise can dictate prevailing ideologies—as if we are held hostage by subject matter experts, community leaders, and the status quo, despite the open-source nature of knowledge. The industry often seems to thrive on mystery and ambiguity, celebrating successes while masking flaws and avoiding difficult conversations—wallet reproducibility being just one example.

Despite efforts like those by the HRF, women often remain the lowest priority. In decision-making that involves exclusion or maintaining a narrative of fairness, women usually face the harshest consequences—If someone has to take the fall, better her than me. I frequently hear that nothing will ever change, that it is what it is, to the point where I sometimes wonder if I'm dreaming too high. It is also hard to believe we are making progress when I see how extremist groups are thriving in the ecosystem, guaranteeing their financial and intellectual superiority.

Do you genuinely believe a more humane and inclusive environment for Bitcoin FOSS development is on the horizon?