Those who read slush know (although it's not cool to talk about in these terms) that the submissions from women and poc are often disproportionately sucky, which is sometimes why even the proportions of women and poc who submit aren't reflected in the proportions of women and poc actually published.
Really, Claire? Who exactly knows that? Certainly not "those who read slush." For instance, Jay Lake doesn't know that:
I've edited 11 anthologies, published at least one story that wound up in Best American Short Stories, and I have not shared your experience of the slush pile.
Nick Mamatas doesn't know that:
I've only been reading slush for both book-length (fiction, poetry, and political non-fiction) and short subjects (overwhelmingly fiction, some non-fiction queries) on and off for eleven years, co-edited a Hugo and World Fantasy Award-nominated magazine for two years, and co-edited two open anthologies, so maybe the thousands of stories and hundreds of book samples and queries I've read were somehow skewed, but I have no problem saying that when it comes to women at least Light is 100 percent wrong... Women are, on average, better writers than men, probably because they read a lot more and perhaps because males who show an interest in writing and reading as children are often gay-baited or picked on.
I don't know that. Ann Leckie doesn't know that. Molly Tanzer doesn't know that. Cat Rambo and Sean Wallace don't know that.
So: who does, Claire? Would you care to give us attribution? By "slush readers know" do you mean that *you* know? Or are you referring to sources in the industry? Who? If you won't name them, at least do us the courtesy of acknowledging that they don't count as all slush readers. Their opinions are not a consensus that can be applied to a monolithic group "slush readers."
While you're at it, Claire, would you like to substantiate your claim? At all?
Or are we just going to let it slip by as a "fact" agreed on by "slush readers?" How lovely.