I'm not sure that "badass" is a bad thing to call someone nowadays. It has
been appropriated by feminists, according to the Atlantic. [1]

They describe it as "a term of acclamation and aspiration, both for women
and for a culture that is finally giving them their due. It’s a recognition
that women can 'radiate confidence in everything they do' just as readily
as men can."

Sarah

[1]
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/11/how-badass-became-feminist/417096/



On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Risker <[email protected]> wrote:

> Unless my vision has completely eroded, I do not see the word "cunt"
> anywhere in that article, Ryan.  Nobody on this list has ever said that
> calling someone a cunt is a good thing.  What I do not understand is why
> anyone on this list would think that calling someone a "badass" is a good
> thing.
>
> Risker
>
>
> On 21 February 2016 at 18:19, Ryan Kaldari <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >"Badass" isn't a compliment.
>>
>> And "cunt" is a friendly term of camaraderie in British English.
>> Apparently I just don't have a good command of the English language.
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Risker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I feel very sad that you fellows don't see the problem in using this
>>> kind of language to describe women. "Badass" isn't a compliment. After the
>>> first two descriptions, I was fully expecting to see "brilliant
>>> motherf***er" to describe the third one.  I'm surprised it wasn't used, in
>>> fact.
>>>
>>> The subjects of our articles deserve to be treated much better than
>>> this.
>>>
>>> Further, I'm incredibly disappointed that this got published in The
>>> Signpost.  On Emily's own page...well, okay.  But instead of drawing
>>> attention to the women who are the subjects of the articles, almost all of
>>> the discussion is about the language used to describe them....and pointing
>>> out that several of them already had articles about them that were
>>> improved, rather than that they'd not been written about at all.
>>>
>>> All in all, it impressed me as an island of lovely flowers in a garden
>>> with a winter's worth of St. Bernard droppings.
>>>
>>> Risker
>>>
>>> On 21 February 2016 at 17:13, Pete Forsyth <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 Ryan.
>>>>
>>>> This was one article, and no Wikipedians, readers, or article subjects
>>>> were injured as a result of its publication. I don't really have a strong
>>>> opinion one way or the other about whether using language in this way is
>>>> OK. But the main lesson to me is how much the English Wikipedia community
>>>> has come to value the Signpost as an institution. It's hard to imagine such
>>>> any Signpost column inspiring so much passion, say, five years ago. Above
>>>> all, I think this constitutes a strong endorsement of the general value of
>>>> the Signpost.
>>>>
>>>> -Pete
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Ryan Kaldari <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The depressing thing to me is that the English Wikipedia community
>>>>> takes all of 10 minutes to work itself into a frenzy about the use of
>>>>> profanity in a positive, non-personal way, but if an editor on Wikipedia
>>>>> calls a female editor a cunt, no one dares to bat an eye.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Risker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it a double standard?  If that page hadn't been written by
>>>>>> Keilana, would it have been published as is?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps you're right, it *is* a double standard.  Just not quite the
>>>>>> one some think it would be.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Risker/Anne
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 21 February 2016 at 08:31, Neotarf <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Op-ed about systemic bias and articles created.  Interesting double
>>>>>>> standard about profanity in the comment section.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-02-17/Op-ed
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>>>>> please visit:
>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>>>> please visit:
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>>> please visit:
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>>>> please visit:
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>>> visit:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>> visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> [email protected]
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
[email protected]
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Reply via email to