A notable omission from the list of "excluded" or "under-represented" groups is lesbian and gay people. On noticing this I contacted the conference organiser who sent out the CFP, Jules Holroyd, to ask her why it was the case and she replied she was unsure whether or not lesbian and gay people are "under-represented" in philosophy or how to discover this. In one sense Holroyd is right since one can see that it is intrinsically difficult to say how many people fall into the category of being lesbian or gay. It is, in senses not applicable to the other categories listed, a mutable notion. However, it is surely undeniable that not only the majority of philosophers behave and identify themselves consistently in ways that show them to be heterosexual. Since this is so and since those who do so relate to themselves are not clearly in a good position to address the way philosophical and academic structures relate to gay experience one would have thought there is a prima facie case to address here.
Putting the problem in terms of "under-representation" ensures that certain minorities are, as often, excluded. Stating this is not to attack the idea of the conference but it is to note the way that its way of being circumscribed has exclusionary implications of its own.