On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Russavia <russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Frankly, I don't know why this is a "feminist" issue; rather than an
> issue of common sense.
> It is not a finite list, and for the vast majority of people on the
> list, being a vegetarian is hardly responsible for even the smallest
> piece of their notability; it is an arbitrary piece of trivia for most
> of them. Take http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Lagarde for
> example, her vegetarianism is but an afterthought in her biography,
> yet she is being placed as the most prominent vegetarian in that
> article. I would argue that this is taking the whole "feminist" issue
> to its most illogical and extreme. ...
> Cheers,
> Russavia

Hi Russavia, the question is why Wikipedia represented 13 women vegetarians
visually by including six porn stars. They were there from at least June
2010 until recently, and even now there are still three. If a similarly
racist situation existed, I think it would have been spotted and dealt with

As of August 2012,
list of women consisted of:

Former porn star in a bikini; Playboy Playmate with breasts half exposed;
tennis player; figure skater; actress; singer; presenter and model;
actress; politician; singer; actress; primatologist; singer; model in a
bikini; Playboy Playmate; dancer; Playboy Playmate; actress; porn actress.

But the list of men was very different:

Doctor and politician; scientist; revolutionary; philosopher; politician;
playwright; chief rabbi; artist; chief rabbi; psychiatrist; journalist;
writer; doctor; novelist; architect; Archbishop of Constantinople; poet;
singer-songwriter; comedian; doctor; football player; actor; musician;
fictional character.

That we allow women and men to be represented so differently suggests that
Wikipedia has a problem recognizing and dealing with sexism. So the
question is why, and how can we change it?

Gendergap mailing list

Reply via email to