title: Inclusion explicite

> So before we begin, I want to reinforce that you *can* program, that you *can* do math, that you *can* design car suspensions and fire suppression systems and spacecraft control software and distributed databases, regardless of what your classmates and media and even fellow engineers think. You don’t have to be white, you don’t have to be straight, you don’t have to be a man. You can grow up never having touched a computer and still become a skilled programmer. Yeah, it’s harder–and yeah, people will give you shit, but that’s not your fault and has nothing to do with your *ability* or your *right* to do what you love. All it takes to be a good engineer, scientist, or mathematician is your curiosity, your passion, the right teaching material, and putting in the hours.
>
> There’s nothing in this guide that’s just for lesbian grandmas or just for mixed-race kids; bros, you’re welcome here too. There’s nothing dumbed down. We’re gonna go as deep into the ideas of programming as I know how to go, and we’re gonna do it with everyone on board.
>
> No matter who you are or who people *think* you are, this guide is for you.
> 
> <cite>*[Clojure from the ground up: welcome](https://aphyr.com/posts/301-clojure-from-the-ground-up-welcome)* ([cache](/david/cache/3e0624e344552c5fe90c30d8c32418dd/))</cite>

Toujours partagé entre l’implicite et l’explicite pour l’inclusion (qui [diffère](https://twitter.com/philroederer/status/570850587966889984) ([cache](/static/david/stream/inclusion.jpg)) de l’intégration). Cela devrait être implicite *mais* en même temps ce n’est pas le cas, *mais* le rendre explicite ne fait qu’entretenir le problème, *mais* le taire c’est encore pire, *mais* c’est culpabilisant, *mais* c’est victimisant, *mais*…
