The evidence about the bias against women science fiction writers continues to mount up. This time it is in relation to the Hugo awards. See here for what Nicola Griffiths has to say about it. Basically the graph (yes we are talking hard numbers and facts here) she produced shows that after about 2000 the proportion of women members of SFWA is higher than the proportion of Hugo Award Nominations.
The analysis was done on the Hugo awards to see what would have happened had we not had the Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies placing bloc nominations and votes. See here for details. But I will pick out one quote:
“Looking deeper into this replacement ballot, one sees right off the bat that the non-slate ballot would have been far more equal when it comes to gender representation, which brings it more in line with the ballots from 2014, 2013 and 2012.”
More general statistics have been gathered over at Strange Horizons. In this case it shows the bias against women is worse in the UK than the USA!
Whilst gathering the evidence with solid hard facts is good… it stops people who believe otherwise or, worse, trying to pull the wool over your eyes in their tracks… it does not identify why the bias exists or how to solve it.
My real fear is that with the Hugo debacle (I can call it no other), is that things will get nastier before they get better.