On 21 February 2016 at 18:42, Robert Fernandez <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 10:39 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?
>>
>
> I'm curious what you mean by this exactly.  Do you mean you think I
> published it because I know Emily personally and would not have published
> it as a submission from an unknown author?  Or are you saying I might not
> have published a similar article by a male author?
>
> (For what it's worth, I re-published an article by a male academic in the
> Signpost last year that had the phrase "asshole consensus" in the title. )
>
>
>

If it had been written by editors who are known to regularly use
profanity,  to the considerable  consternation of some members of the
community, would you publish it?  I mean...it just gave me plenty of
warning not to bother participating in the edit-a-thon I usually go to each
spring, since it is now apparently considered a net positive to report on
new articles about women in such a derogatory way.  That's fine. It made it
clear that The Signpost would rather be sensationalistic than informative.
That's fine too, I can take it off my watchlist again.

No, it's pretty obvious that the profanity-laden article was published
because it was profanity-laden, not because it was any good.

Risker/Anne
_______________________________________________
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