On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: >.... > For an example of a woman exasperated by Wikipedia's handling of sexual > content, see this > post http://www.junkland.net/2011/11/donkey-punch-or-how-i-tried-to-fight.html by > blogger Penny Sociologist, which my wife somehow came across. > > This concerned a crudely animated cartoon of a woman being struck in the > back of the neck during sex, which the blogger had encountered in a > Wikipedia article. Here is a quote from her post, commenting on Wikipedia's > editorial process: > > ---o0o--- > > Let's revisit the serious, consensus-building Discussion page for donkey > punching: > > Misogynist: "Just want to say that the picture with this article is > HILARIOUS!!! > > Another Misogynist: "Same here. It made me laugh for a good 10 minutes." > > Voice of Reason: "As this act is probably apocryphal and possibly lethal, I > would suggest the current picture is unnecessary and inappropriate and > should therefore be removed." > > Another Misogynist: "And I would suggest that ur a fag who has a stick up > the butt." > > Somewhere later down the page, while misogynists coldly discuss the merits > of an earlier illustration that wasn't animated, one says: "Preferably the > image shouldn't be a cartoon, but actually showing a real couple." > > So there you have Wikipedia's "serious discussion" and "consensus" > building. > > ---o0o---
That is, in my opinion, an actionable user behavior problem, even without the gender related issues. Those clearly make it worse, of course. I will go look it up later, but it's probably too stale to do anything about it now. 8-( -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
