Can American genealogical conferences and other events embrace diversity? Back in 2013, I attended my first fairly large genealogical conferences, a regional one and an international one. After the first one, I started a post of suggestions for American genealogical conferences, which I expanded after the second one but have never finished and posted it. Prompted by DearMYRTLE’s discussions on her blog this week, I wanted to pull the point that I feel is the most important from that draft – the issue of diversity in topics and attendees – and expand upon it. Before (or after, if you really prefer) reading my post, I suggest you read Myrt’s posts and the many comments to some of them. Here are the links to her posts:
- What does Ferguson teach the genealogy community?
- Ferguson: Geoff’s response
- Ferguson: George’s reply
- Ferguson: Unintentional Bias – Call to Action for program chairs
Following was one of my suggestions for American genealogical conferences that I wrote in 2013 a week or two after attending the New England Regional Genealogical Consortium (NERGC) 2013 Conference, which had been decidedly lacking in seeming diversity both in attendees and topics:
Reach out to organizations that are specifically focused on the history and/or genealogy of people of color, religions other than Christianity, and other so-called “minorities,” trying to get more speakers and attendees from these groups. Most lectures at most if not all American genealogy conferences focus by default on the experiences of white Christians, and while of course I cannot judge the heritage of someone else, most attendees at most of them appear to be white. Even most of the lectures that were focused on various “minorities” at NERGC 2013 and at other regional events that I have attended were given by people who do not personally identify with the group on which they are speaking. This is not to say that someone can’t become experienced at researching people other than their own self-identification; if that were the case, only people with a completely homogenous background would be able to successfully research their own family’s history and historians would only be able to do good research on people just like them. But after attending many lectures, I believe that people who are a part of the group being presented bring a different perspective to a lecture than people who are approaching it from an outsider’s perspective, and I also think that the best presenters are fully cognizant of this. Part of why I think this would be such a great idea – beyond the obvious issue of diversity or lack thereof – is because you cannot judge someone’s research interests based on how they physically appear to you.
Since typing the above and failing to ever post my draft, I have attended many more genealogical and historical events, including a second conference, the International Association of Jewish Genealogical Societies’ (IAJGS) 2013 Conference. I want to stress again that I cannot speak for others’ self-identification nor their heritage, but based on my perceptions alone, there were significantly more people who appeared to be persons of color at IAGJS than there had been at NERGC. There have also been more people who appeared to be persons of color at historical events I have attended that had to do with slavery in Massachusetts than there were at either genealogical conference, and as I noted in my most recent post, I think this speaks to the fact that if topics of interest are discussed and the event is advertised in a way where persons of color see it, persons of color will attend. This seems to me to be pretty basic, but based on my experiences as a white genealogist and the experiences of a number of genealogists I know from a variety of backgrounds and heritages, it seems to be beyond what the planning committees for many genealogical conferences/seminars and other genealogical events do.
In my humble opinion, these are some things that could be a good start at changing things for the better in the American genealogical world:
- If an organization hosting a conference/seminar/etc. comes up with themes or suggested proposal topics in advance, try to ensure that these include a wide variety of topics. While an organizer might think, “This topic wouldn’t be of interest to my intended audience” – how can they know for sure that it wouldn’t unless they try it? And how can they know what their future audience might potentially be unless they offer topics that attract a wide range of attendees?
- More widely advertise calls for proposals to reach a more diverse group, and take chances on proposals from speakers that aren’t already familiar to you.
- Similarly, advertise conferences, seminars, and other events in a wide variety of ways and places to reach as many potential attendees as possible. I feel that some genealogical organizations and groups create a self-fulfilling prophecy by trying to make everything appeal to their current or most recent attendees, so I feel that (1) and (2) are important for (3), because most people only attend things that they expect to find interesting and/or useful and which they expect to be worth the cost.
- As Eva Goodwin eloquently stressed in a comment on one of Dear Myrtle’s posts this week, the default in the American genealogical world seems to be that anyone who is a general genealogical expert speaker is someone who is perceived as white, regardless of the fact that most well-known white genealogical speakers are specialists in one or two “niche” kinds of research and despite the fact that, to use the specific example that Eva used in her comment, African-American genealogical research is difficult to do so anyone who is really good at doing it must also be really good at doing genealogical research in general. We need to work to change this – and by “we” I mean everyone in the American genealogical community.
- Please, please, please consider offering a discount on attending a single day of a multi-day conference. Many American genealogical conferences offer single-day registration that is nearly as expensive as attending the entire conference. How many more people could they be attracting if they offered reasonable single-day registration? Before you, dear reader, say “Then it would be overwhelmed on Saturday,” this August I attended the first-ever Celtic Connections Conference, which offered more affordable single-day registration, and there were a number of people who were more interested in Friday’s topics and only attended on Friday, so both days sold out in advance even though a number of people only attended one day or the other of the two-day conference. Without financially-reasonable options for people who are only interested in one day’s lectures or who work on weekdays and can only attend weekend events, an entire pool of people will skip a multi-day event entirely. And yes, I am already well-aware that “Genealogy is an expensive hobby,” to quote a common response to such suggestions. A lot of genealogists are at jobs whose paychecks help fund their genealogical hobby but which they can’t leave just to attend an event.
If we want to have a thriving American genealogical community, we need to embrace a diversity of people – from many different races, heritages, classes, religions, sexual orientations, and so on. The more voices we help to come through the din, the better our community will be for it and the better all of us will be as genealogists.
—
I want to thank Myrt for her posts as they prompted me to finally post and I also want to thank my Twitter friend who goes by The Descendant for encouraging me to finish and post my suggestions when she found out earlier this I’d been working on my original suggestions post – I’ve kept your encouragement in mind all this time, and hopefully you’ll feel this is better late than never!
This discussion reminds me of my career as a web consultant. A client had a website that did not work in Firefox. I pointed out that this was a problem that needed to be fixed. Their response? “We can see in our stats that none of our visitors use Firefox so that’s a waste of money.” Well of course no-one of the people who used the site used Firefox, because the site did not work for them so they did not show up in the stats.
I think the same is true for genealogy events. If we keep offering topics for white Christians, we should not be surprised at a lack of minority attendees. And we should definitely not use the lack of minority attendees as an excuse to not offer topics related to those minorities.
Thanks for commenting, Yvette. I think your Firefox story is a great analogy for these issues.
I am always looking for more creative ways to research challenging ancestors, and go looking for articles/webinars/podcasts featuring African-American genealogists. Their research is much more difficult than finding an Irish woman in the early 1800s!! So, I know that if I listen and watch their processes carefully, I’ll learn, I’ll learn a lot!!
(disclaimer – I’m a white non-American, non-religious genealogy nut)
Thanks for commenting, Celia. I agree and I think it illustrates well why they would make great “general genealogy” case studies.
Excellent job Liz! A lot of this should be obvious and yet conference after conference the same mistakes are made. Tech and comic cons have been realizing that they have the same problems in the last few years. Money and timing are definitely an issue. Why would I take off from work, fly across country, pay for a hotel, food, transportation and conference fees to attend an event that does not cater to any of my research interests? I am still miffed about Roots Tech 2014. I was only able to go because my school paid for it. Out of the dozens and dozens of presentations not one was on African American genealogy. There was one on what Family Search is doing in Africa and there was a presentation on genealogy in Spanish and that was it.
Also, great timing for your post. Once again America is in the midst of another national race conversation that most of us are continuing to only have within our own racial groups. America has been diverse since the very beginning. Our histories have always been intertwined even when our bodies have been segregated. It can be uncomfortable for us to talk about the difficult stories of race, privilege and oppression in our family histories. We don’t want to feel ashamed of the people we are so proud of finding. I think that is really why these genealogy conferences refuse to diversify. Still it needs to be done. All these opposing sides we find ourselves on when it comes to current problems are due to our inability to deal with historical issues. We desperately need a #GenealogicalSocietiesRespondtoFerguson.
Thanks very much for your lengthy, thoughtful comment. At one of the lectures I attended on slavery in Massachusetts, someone who appeared to be an African-American said that in the Q&A period he thought an event that the speaker had discussed was the most important event for African-Americans until Ferguson. I think it shows how important it is to have a diverse audience as well as having diverse speakers/topics; none of the several people who spoke/asked questions before or after him said anything at all to tie the lecture’s topics in to anything that happened later historically, much less anything happening today.
Even when I am attending a local event (much less a distant one), I want to feel it is worth my time and (if not free) money to attend it. If a multi-lecture event is supposed to appeal to a broad range of genealogists but focuses on narrow topics aiming to target one or more certain groups, of course they are going to primarily attract people within that narrow group. It seems so simple, and yet it really seems so beyond many conference/event planners. Another thing is if a group/society plans something and get low attendance and use it as proof that the would-be audience isn’t there . . . when they didn’t even try to reach the intended audience. I have attended a number of historical events on African-Americans/Africans and on Native Americans, and I can say for sure that at least locally here in the Boston area, the audience is there if they can be reached!
I’d like to give a shout-out to the Southern California Genealogical Society for having a diverse panel of speakers for their webinar program. One of the webinars scheduled for December is by Timothy Pinnick, who is doing a community study involving Black Coal miners. I got a sneak peek at some of his research during a webinar he presented on the WWI Draft Registration Cards, one of his sources for this project. We can learn so much from studying one record group in depth, and by studying the entire community instead of focusing on just one family. I am grateful to Tim for encouraging us to take a larger view of these records.