They didn't "have their conference cancelled". They cancelled it because they felt pressure from their sponsors. Without more example or explanation, we have to take them at their word that the pressure was on level with a witch-hunt. If that's the case, that is indeed a poor state of affairs in terms of open debate and civility.
They cancelled it because they felt pressure from their sponsors.
I'm skeptical about this. The company I work for were the only sponsor formally announced on their site. We were behind them 100% and didn't have a clue about the controversy or the cancellation until we found out after they made their decision. It doesn't add up. If financial strain was a reason, why not contact us to see if we could help?
If I organised a conference, and failed to attract a single female speaker, especially in a community where sexism is a sensitive issue, I would immediately decide to cancel it of my own volition. I don't want to contribute to the type of things that make women feel excluded.
So if women choose not to be included on your activity, you would cancel it, because women would feel excluded? OK....
If I never took part in anything that didn't attract females (that were not family), I would have never learned anything, or seen any movies, or eaten any food...
That's a bit of a disingenuous comparison. Organizing a conference that should be representative of a very large, diverse community is not quite the same as organizing personal activities.
