Re: [Gendergap] [Foundation-l] Fundraising is for men
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Nicole Willson artisticaltru...@gmail.com wrote: Given my background in wikis and fundraising for women's non-profits (YWCA and the National Organization for Women among others), I'd just like to point out a few things: 1. When I visited the first link, I saw that half the respondents are married. I know from the donations I've handled and the donating habits of other married couples (including my parents), that often a check or credit card will be in the name of the husband, but the donation often comes from both people in the couple or it could just be the wife using the husbands account. I didn't see a methodology section, but does anyone know how couples were handled in gathering this data? Were both of their genders looked at in this report? My experience concurs with this. When I was treasurer for Wikimedia France, we received lots of donations (checks mostly at the time, a common way to donate in France) in the name of a man. However, the accompanying card/letter was in at least 50% of cases that of a woman. So yes, I believe that women ar the driving force behind many donations, but just don't appear to be. In Germany, studies show that more women donate to charitable organisations than men do. However, only 19% of WIkimedia Deutschland's donors are women (with the bias expressed above), so yes, we're looking into targeting women donors more accurately. Best, Delphine Treasurer Wikimedia Deutschland ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] [Foundation-l] Fundraising is for men
2011/12/1 Carol Moore carolmoor...@verizon.net On 11/29/2011 5:19 PM, emijrp wrote: So, the first step would be to try and figure out if women are visiting the site and not editing or just not visiting at all, before saying nonsense about sexism and Wikipedia community. Fundraising from women is an interesting topic. You may think comments about sexism and the Wikipedia community are nonsense, but guess what. Women who take a lot of sexist nonsense AT wikipedia sure aren't going to donate TO wikipedia, are they? Also, since women in general are busier with work AND family responsibilities, so often the women who have the most time to edit are unemployed, disabled, retired or otherwise on limited incomes. [citation needed] Furthermore, editing Wikipedia only requires 30 minutes a day/week. I'm sure all women waste more time watching TV. But watching TV is funnier for most the people. In the other hand, looks like women in all ages have time to waste in Facebook http://www.kenburbary.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Image1_thumb3.png And gender balance is fifty-fifty. Finally, if the reason for the low female editors proportion is time, how can Wikipedia solve that? Are we going to pay to female editors for their time? I can think of a few. Besides a ten spot here and a ten spot there, we can't give large amounts of money. But there are women with big bucks out there giving lots to women-friendly organizations left and right. We must make Wikipedia women friendly to get their money. You are wrong. To see donation banners and to donate only reading is required, not editing. Are you going to say that only poor women read Wikipedia? By they way, making Wikipedia women friendly? What does that mean? Is that a new politically correct science? Better, make Wikipedia friendly to disabled people, the great forgotten excluded people group. For example, blind people can't sign up because of Wikipedia captcha (there is no sound captcha https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4845). That is a real barrier which Wikimedia Foundation have to solve putting resources. Where is the accessibility mailing list? Accessibility is a recommendation by W3C since 1997, and we are in the top ten websites, as WMF likes to boast. Anyway, putting down one of the main concerns of this list as nonsense is not helpful. Sure. For your information, this mailing list is a insult to the real excluded people. Thanks. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] [Foundation-l] Fundraising is for men
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 9:23 AM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote: Sure. For your information, this mailing list is a insult to the real excluded people. Why is this... individual on this mailing list, if they despise our very reason for existing? -- Michael J. Orange Mike Lowrey When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes. -- Desiderius Erasmus ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] [Foundation-l] Fundraising is for men
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 7:23 AM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/12/1 Carol Moore carolmoor...@verizon.net Fundraising from women is an interesting topic. You may think comments about sexism and the Wikipedia community are nonsense, but guess what. Women who take a lot of sexist nonsense AT wikipedia sure aren't going to donate TO wikipedia, are they? Also, since women in general are busier with work AND family responsibilities, so often the women who have the most time to edit are unemployed, disabled, retired or otherwise on limited incomes. [citation needed] Furthermore, editing Wikipedia only requires 30 minutes a day/week. I'm sure all women waste more time watching TV. But watching TV is funnier for most the people. In the other hand, looks like women in all ages have time to waste in Facebook http://www.kenburbary.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Image1_thumb3.pngAnd gender balance is fifty-fifty. The above statement about the women who have the time to edit WP is patently false, and not my experience with the women I see around the project. Most of those women are single and childless; I think that I may be the only serious WP content editor who is married and has children, or at least the only one I know about. The above statement also buys into the stereotype that we're trying to combat in WP. I think it's true that most women are busy with homes and family, and they choose to volunteer their time in other ways. I volunteer in other ways, too, and my interests in WP match my interests in home and family. I spend an average of 30 minutes a day editing, and I think of it as both a creative outlet and as a way to volunteer. I wonder if WP editing were presented to women in that way it would make a difference. Want to make the world a better place? Edit Wikipedia! ;) Christine Username: Figureskatingfan ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] [Foundation-l] Fundraising is for men
On Dec 1, 2011, at 10:54 AM, Christine Meyer christinewme...@gmail.com wrote: Most of those women are single and childless; I think that I may be the only serious WP content editor who is married and has children, or at least the only one I know about. The above statement also buys into the stereotype that we're trying to combat in WP. Nope. I can think of several, just offhand, including one with more than 80,000 edits. --- Philippe Beaudette Head of Reader Relations Wikimedia Foundation Inc. phili...@wikimedia.org Sent from my iPad. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] [Foundation-l] Fundraising is for men
Pardon me for stereotyping without evidence. Bad original posts sometimes lead to bad responses. ;-( Hear hear as to why people opposed to the concept posting on the list. On 12/1/2011 12:01 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote: On Dec 1, 2011, at 10:54 AM, Christine Meyerchristinewme...@gmail.com wrote: Most of those women are single and childless; I think that I may be the only serious WP content editor who is married and has children, or at least the only one I know about. The above statement also buys into the stereotype that we're trying to combat in WP. Nope. I can think of several, just offhand, including one with more than 80,000 edits. --- Philippe Beaudette Head of Reader Relations Wikimedia Foundation Inc. phili...@wikimedia.org ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] [Foundation-l] Fundraising is for men
2011/11/29 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com On 29 November 2011 21:51, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote: Dear all; We have heard many times that most Wikipedians are male, but have you heard about gender and fundraising? Some data from a 2010 study[1] and a 2011 German study[2] (question 20th of 22). People have said that Wikipedia is a sexist place which excludes women to edit. Looks like women neither are interested on editing nor funding free knowledge. Is WMF working to increase female donors just like female editors? I think the first step would be to try and figure out if women are visiting the site and not donating or just not visiting at all. So, the first step would be to try and figure out if women are visiting the site and not editing or just not visiting at all, before saying nonsense about sexism and Wikipedia community. You would also want to make sure there really is a significant imbalance and that it's not just that men are more likely to fill out the survey form. That affects to all surveys, again. Looks like people only care about surveys which say what they want to read. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundatio...@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] [Foundation-l] Fundraising is for men
I actually have interest in the gender of Wikimedia fundraising donors, I think I've voiced that interest publicly a few times, in the past. Perhaps next fundraiser we'll be able to explore opportunities like that, or maybe WMF and chapters are gathering data related to gender. I was hoping to see a bigger push towards having women represented in the fundraiser, with hope perhaps it'd attract female donors, and even female contributors, (or donors and contributors in general of course) but, there has been only one woman who has been showcased, thus far. -Sarah Dear all; We have heard many times that most Wikipedians are male, but have you heard about gender and fundraising? Some data from a 2010 study[1] and a 2011 German study[2] (question 20th of 22). People have said that Wikipedia is a sexist place which excludes women to edit. Looks like women neither are interested on editing nor funding free knowledge. Is WMF working to increase female donors just like female editors? -- Sarah Stierch Consulting -- Historical, cultural, new media artistic research advising. http://www.sarahstierch.com ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] [Foundation-l] Fundraising is for men
Given my background in wikis and fundraising for women's non-profits (YWCA and the National Organization for Women among others), I'd just like to point out a few things: 1. When I visited the first link, I saw that half the respondents are married. I know from the donations I've handled and the donating habits of other married couples (including my parents), that often a check or credit card will be in the name of the husband, but the donation often comes from both people in the couple or it could just be the wife using the husbands account. I didn't see a methodology section, but does anyone know how couples were handled in gathering this data? Were both of their genders looked at in this report? 2. When hearing a fundraising officer from Princeton University speak, I learned that women are less likely to want things named after them. For example, Meg Whitman (of eBay fame) was hesitant to name a building named after her at Princeton. That makes me think that women may be more likely to make anonymous donations. Does anyone know if anonymous donors were included in this report? 3. Organizations like Women in Development (several local chapters throughout the US) is a great organization and might have people willing to share ideas about how to target fundraising campaigns toward women. On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.comwrote: I actually have interest in the gender of Wikimedia fundraising donors, I think I've voiced that interest publicly a few times, in the past. Perhaps next fundraiser we'll be able to explore opportunities like that, or maybe WMF and chapters are gathering data related to gender. I was hoping to see a bigger push towards having women represented in the fundraiser, with hope perhaps it'd attract female donors, and even female contributors, (or donors and contributors in general of course) but, there has been only one woman who has been showcased, thus far. -Sarah Dear all; We have heard many times that most Wikipedians are male, but have you heard about gender and fundraising? Some data from a 2010 study[1] and a 2011 German study[2] (question 20th of 22). People have said that Wikipedia is a sexist place which excludes women to edit. Looks like women neither are interested on editing nor funding free knowledge. Is WMF working to increase female donors just like female editors? -- Sarah Stierch Consulting -- Historical, cultural, new media artistic research advising. http://www.sarahstierch.com ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap -- Only the shallow know themselves. - Oscar Wilde ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
