Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Sarah Stierch]

;>>> a go at giving it some context so readers can go from one article to the
>>>> next (specifically, from "courtship" to "dating" to "college dating") but I
>>>> agree that it would be better if it was renamed, as the issues that are
>>>> distinctive to dating in college/university could then be developed.
>>>>
>>>> Gillian
>>>>
>>>> On 25 October 2011 06:11, Sue Gardner  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, personally I think the subject is notable. There has been tons
>>>>> of academic research and popular history written about the history of
>>>>> dating, college dating, the invention of the 'teenager,' etc. Even
>>>>> just within the United States.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I did a radio series on this once -- IIRC, Beth Bailey was a
>>>>> really great source. She wrote this fascinating book:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.amazon.com/Front-Porch-Back-Seat-Twentieth-Century/dp/0801839351
>>>>> .
>>>>> Susan J. Douglas was good too, as well as Stephanie Coontz and Barbara
>>>>> Ehrenreich. They are all American, though. Lots has been written about
>>>>> the UK too, but I'm not sure about other cultures/countries.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Sue
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Sue Gardner
>>>>> Executive Director
>>>>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>>>>
>>>>> 415 839 6885 office
>>>>> 415 816 9967 cell
>>>>>
>>>>> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
>>>>> the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
>>>>>
>>>>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 24 October 2011 11:16, Daniel and Elizabeth Case
>>>>>   wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > -Original Message-
>>>>> > From: Nathan
>>>>> > Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 2:13 PM
>>>>> > To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
>>>>> > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I question whether "college dating" deserves an article to begin
>>>>> with.
>>>>> > If it does, which the text of the article doesn't at all establish,
>>>>> > the current article has a pretty fatal case of systemic bias.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >On the surface I tend to agree, but then I read the AfD:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/College_dating
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Daniel Case
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > ___
>>>>> > 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> Gendergap mailing 
>>>> listGendergap@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia <http://www.glamwiki.org>
>>> Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American 
>>> Art<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>
>>> and
>>> Sarah Stierch Consulting
>>> *Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
>>> --
>>> http://www.sarahstierch.com/
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia <http://www.glamwiki.org>
> Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American 
> Art<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>
> and
> Sarah Stierch Consulting
> *Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
> --
> http://www.sarahstierch.com/
>
>


-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia <http://www.glamwiki.org>
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Art<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Sarah Stierch]

I also noticed the menu in the top right lists dating in the abuse
section (and activities).

I understand that abuse can take place during dating (and any other
relationship at that) but does it really merit being in the abuse section?
Next to "child" "elderly" and "domestic?"

If you're dating someone and you're abusing them I consider it domestic
(Intimate Partner Violence, etc.)but, I haven't sat down and read
references about 'dating abuse' or whatever (and I probably won't right
now..). Heck, the word "abuse" isn't even used in the dating article.

If abuse is dating and I need to stop being sarcastic and wear more bright
colors..I suppose I've been doing all of this wrong after all...(now wonder
I'm single! ;-) )

Sarah




On 25 October 2011 16:24, Sarah Stierch  wrote:
>
>> Wow.
>>
>> Just...wow.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
>>
>>>  If you really want some entertainment, you should try reading the
>>> "dating" article. It includes such mind-blowing revelations as:
>>>
>>> * Teenagers and tweens have been described as dating.
>>>
>>> * There are reports that guys are asking out girls for dates by text
>>> messaging.
>>>
>>> * When young people are in school, they have a lot of access to people
>>> their own age, and don't need tools such as online websites or dating
>>> services.
>>>
>>> And of course lots of great gender stereotypes like:
>>>
>>> * During much of human history... women "connived to trade beauty and sex
>>> for affluence and status".
>>>
>>> * Educated women in many countries including Italy and Russia and the
>>> United States often find it difficult to have a career as well as raise a
>>> family; many delay finding a mate and having children and wonder if they're
>>> too accomplished that they won't be as appealing to men.
>>>
>>> It also includes lots of random advice like:
>>>
>>> * dating at a movie is advisable only if followed by a drink afterwards.
>>>
>>> * men are attracted to 'curls', 'ribbons', 'bright colors', and women
>>> should 'avoid sarcasm.'
>>>
>>> * Women can use 'pseudo-infantile motions such as the head-cock' and gaze
>>> intensely with widened eyes and laugh often, touch, and move in ways to
>>> emphasize their body's roundness, such as shrugging their shoulders or sit
>>> hugging their knees, to mimic buttock imagery.
>>>
>>> I swear this stuff is in the article. I couldn't make this up!
>>>
>>> And to illustrate the "Dating worldwide" section, they use the painting
>>> "The Rape Of The Sabines: The Abduction" which shows a guy with a sword
>>> carrying off a scantily clad damsel in distress. I guess our editors have
>>> some unique ideas on dating etiquette.
>>>
>>> Ryan Kaldari
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/24/11 6:00 PM, Gillian White wrote:
>>>
>>> Apart from any content problems, the article had no context. It was not
>>> linked to what should be regarded as its parents. And that lack of
>>> coherence, combined with its specific terminology made it largely
>>> incomprehensible to people unfamiliar with American educational systems,
>>> aside from its social practices. For example, it is by no means universal
>>> that students live in residential colleges while attending university. I had
>>> a go at giving it some context so readers can go from one article to the
>>> next (specifically, from "courtship" to "dating" to "college dating") but I
>>> agree that it would be better if it was renamed, as the issues that are
>>> distinctive to dating in college/university could then be developed.
>>>
>>> Gillian
>>>
>>> On 25 October 2011 06:11, Sue Gardner  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, personally I think the subject is notable. There has been tons
>>>> of academic research and popular history written about the history of
>>>> dating, college dating, the invention of the 'teenager,' etc. Even
>>>> just within the United States.
>>>>
>>>> I think I did a radio series on this once -- IIRC, Beth Bailey was a
>>>> really great source. She wrote this fascinating book:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.amazon.com/Front-Porch-Back-Seat-Twe

Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Gillian White]

; Apart from any content problems, the article had no context. It was not
>> linked to what should be regarded as its parents. And that lack of
>> coherence, combined with its specific terminology made it largely
>> incomprehensible to people unfamiliar with American educational systems,
>> aside from its social practices. For example, it is by no means universal
>> that students live in residential colleges while attending university. I had
>> a go at giving it some context so readers can go from one article to the
>> next (specifically, from "courtship" to "dating" to "college dating") but I
>> agree that it would be better if it was renamed, as the issues that are
>> distinctive to dating in college/university could then be developed.
>>
>> Gillian
>>
>> On 25 October 2011 06:11, Sue Gardner  wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, personally I think the subject is notable. There has been tons
>>> of academic research and popular history written about the history of
>>> dating, college dating, the invention of the 'teenager,' etc. Even
>>> just within the United States.
>>>
>>> I think I did a radio series on this once -- IIRC, Beth Bailey was a
>>> really great source. She wrote this fascinating book:
>>>
>>> http://www.amazon.com/Front-Porch-Back-Seat-Twentieth-Century/dp/0801839351
>>> .
>>> Susan J. Douglas was good too, as well as Stephanie Coontz and Barbara
>>> Ehrenreich. They are all American, though. Lots has been written about
>>> the UK too, but I'm not sure about other cultures/countries.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sue
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sue Gardner
>>> Executive Director
>>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>>
>>> 415 839 6885 office
>>> 415 816 9967 cell
>>>
>>> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
>>> the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
>>>
>>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24 October 2011 11:16, Daniel and Elizabeth Case
>>>   wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -Original Message-
>>> > From: Nathan
>>> > Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 2:13 PM
>>> > To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
>>> > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?
>>> >
>>> > I question whether "college dating" deserves an article to begin with.
>>> > If it does, which the text of the article doesn't at all establish,
>>> > the current article has a pretty fatal case of systemic bias.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >On the surface I tend to agree, but then I read the AfD:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/College_dating
>>> >
>>> > Daniel Case
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ___
>>> > 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing 
>> listGendergap@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia <http://www.glamwiki.org>
> Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American 
> Art<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>
> and
> Sarah Stierch Consulting
> *Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
> --
> http://www.sarahstierch.com/
>
>
> ___
> 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] Am I crazy?

[Philippe Beaudette]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:

> **
> If you really want some entertainment, you should try reading the "dating"
> article. It includes such mind-blowing revelations as:
>
>


Mr. Kaldari?

Best.
Post.
Ever.



___
Philippe Beaudette
Head of Reader Relations
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

415-839-6885, x 6643

phili...@wikimedia.org
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Sarah Stierch]

Wow.

Just...wow.

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:

> **
> If you really want some entertainment, you should try reading the "dating"
> article. It includes such mind-blowing revelations as:
>
> * Teenagers and tweens have been described as dating.
>
> * There are reports that guys are asking out girls for dates by text
> messaging.
>
> * When young people are in school, they have a lot of access to people
> their own age, and don't need tools such as online websites or dating
> services.
>
> And of course lots of great gender stereotypes like:
>
> * During much of human history... women "connived to trade beauty and sex
> for affluence and status".
>
> * Educated women in many countries including Italy and Russia and the
> United States often find it difficult to have a career as well as raise a
> family; many delay finding a mate and having children and wonder if they're
> too accomplished that they won't be as appealing to men.
>
> It also includes lots of random advice like:
>
> * dating at a movie is advisable only if followed by a drink afterwards.
>
> * men are attracted to 'curls', 'ribbons', 'bright colors', and women
> should 'avoid sarcasm.'
>
> * Women can use 'pseudo-infantile motions such as the head-cock' and gaze
> intensely with widened eyes and laugh often, touch, and move in ways to
> emphasize their body's roundness, such as shrugging their shoulders or sit
> hugging their knees, to mimic buttock imagery.
>
> I swear this stuff is in the article. I couldn't make this up!
>
> And to illustrate the "Dating worldwide" section, they use the painting
> "The Rape Of The Sabines: The Abduction" which shows a guy with a sword
> carrying off a scantily clad damsel in distress. I guess our editors have
> some unique ideas on dating etiquette.
>
> Ryan Kaldari
>
>
> On 10/24/11 6:00 PM, Gillian White wrote:
>
> Apart from any content problems, the article had no context. It was not
> linked to what should be regarded as its parents. And that lack of
> coherence, combined with its specific terminology made it largely
> incomprehensible to people unfamiliar with American educational systems,
> aside from its social practices. For example, it is by no means universal
> that students live in residential colleges while attending university. I had
> a go at giving it some context so readers can go from one article to the
> next (specifically, from "courtship" to "dating" to "college dating") but I
> agree that it would be better if it was renamed, as the issues that are
> distinctive to dating in college/university could then be developed.
>
> Gillian
>
> On 25 October 2011 06:11, Sue Gardner  wrote:
>
>> Yeah, personally I think the subject is notable. There has been tons
>> of academic research and popular history written about the history of
>> dating, college dating, the invention of the 'teenager,' etc. Even
>> just within the United States.
>>
>> I think I did a radio series on this once -- IIRC, Beth Bailey was a
>> really great source. She wrote this fascinating book:
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/Front-Porch-Back-Seat-Twentieth-Century/dp/0801839351
>> .
>> Susan J. Douglas was good too, as well as Stephanie Coontz and Barbara
>> Ehrenreich. They are all American, though. Lots has been written about
>> the UK too, but I'm not sure about other cultures/countries.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sue
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sue Gardner
>> Executive Director
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>
>> 415 839 6885 office
>> 415 816 9967 cell
>>
>> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
>> the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
>>
>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>>
>>
>>
>> On 24 October 2011 11:16, Daniel and Elizabeth Case
>>   wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: Nathan
>> > Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 2:13 PM
>> > To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
>> > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?
>> >
>> > I question whether "college dating" deserves an article to begin with.
>> > If it does, which the text of the article doesn't at all establish,
>> > the current article has a pretty fatal case of systemic bias.
>> >
>> >
>> >On the surface I tend to agree, but then I read the AfD:
>> >
>> >
>> ht

Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Ryan Kaldari]

If you really want some entertainment, you should try reading the 
"dating" article. It includes such mind-blowing revelations as:


* Teenagers and tweens have been described as dating.

* There are reports that guys are asking out girls for dates by text 
messaging.


* When young people are in school, they have a lot of access to people 
their own age, and don't need tools such as online websites or dating 
services.


And of course lots of great gender stereotypes like:

* During much of human history... women "connived to trade beauty and 
sex for affluence and status".


* Educated women in many countries including Italy and Russia and the 
United States often find it difficult to have a career as well as raise 
a family; many delay finding a mate and having children and wonder if 
they're too accomplished that they won't be as appealing to men.


It also includes lots of random advice like:

* dating at a movie is advisable only if followed by a drink afterwards.

* men are attracted to 'curls', 'ribbons', 'bright colors', and women 
should 'avoid sarcasm.'


* Women can use 'pseudo-infantile motions such as the head-cock' and 
gaze intensely with widened eyes and laugh often, touch, and move in 
ways to emphasize their body's roundness, such as shrugging their 
shoulders or sit hugging their knees, to mimic buttock imagery.


I swear this stuff is in the article. I couldn't make this up!

And to illustrate the "Dating worldwide" section, they use the painting 
"The Rape Of The Sabines: The Abduction" which shows a guy with a sword 
carrying off a scantily clad damsel in distress. I guess our editors 
have some unique ideas on dating etiquette.


Ryan Kaldari


On 10/24/11 6:00 PM, Gillian White wrote:
Apart from any content problems, the article had no context. It was 
not linked to what should be regarded as its parents. And that lack of 
coherence, combined with its specific terminology made it largely 
incomprehensible to people unfamiliar with American educational 
systems, aside from its social practices. For example, it is by no 
means universal that students live in residential colleges while 
attending university. I had a go at giving it some context so readers 
can go from one article to the next (specifically, from "courtship" to 
"dating" to "college dating") but I agree that it would be better if 
it was renamed, as the issues that are distinctive to dating in 
college/university could then be developed.


Gillian

On 25 October 2011 06:11, Sue Gardner <mailto:sgard...@wikimedia.org>> wrote:


Yeah, personally I think the subject is notable. There has been tons
of academic research and popular history written about the history of
dating, college dating, the invention of the 'teenager,' etc. Even
just within the United States.

I think I did a radio series on this once -- IIRC, Beth Bailey was a
really great source. She wrote this fascinating book:
http://www.amazon.com/Front-Porch-Back-Seat-Twentieth-Century/dp/0801839351.
Susan J. Douglas was good too, as well as Stephanie Coontz and Barbara
Ehrenreich. They are all American, though. Lots has been written about
the UK too, but I'm not sure about other cultures/countries.

Thanks,
Sue


--
Sue Gardner
Executive Director
Wikimedia Foundation

415 839 6885  office
415 816 9967  cell

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate



On 24 October 2011 11:16, Daniel and Elizabeth Case
mailto:danc...@frontiernet.net>> wrote:
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Nathan
> Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 2:13 PM
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?
>
> I question whether "college dating" deserves an article to begin
with.
> If it does, which the text of the article doesn't at all establish,
> the current article has a pretty fatal case of systemic bias.
>
>
>On the surface I tend to agree, but then I read the AfD:
>
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/College_dating
>
> Daniel Case
>
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
http

Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Gillian White]

Apart from any content problems, the article had no context. It was not
linked to what should be regarded as its parents. And that lack of
coherence, combined with its specific terminology made it largely
incomprehensible to people unfamiliar with American educational systems,
aside from its social practices. For example, it is by no means universal
that students live in residential colleges while attending university. I had
a go at giving it some context so readers can go from one article to the
next (specifically, from "courtship" to "dating" to "college dating") but I
agree that it would be better if it was renamed, as the issues that are
distinctive to dating in college/university could then be developed.

Gillian

On 25 October 2011 06:11, Sue Gardner  wrote:

> Yeah, personally I think the subject is notable. There has been tons
> of academic research and popular history written about the history of
> dating, college dating, the invention of the 'teenager,' etc. Even
> just within the United States.
>
> I think I did a radio series on this once -- IIRC, Beth Bailey was a
> really great source. She wrote this fascinating book:
> http://www.amazon.com/Front-Porch-Back-Seat-Twentieth-Century/dp/0801839351
> .
> Susan J. Douglas was good too, as well as Stephanie Coontz and Barbara
> Ehrenreich. They are all American, though. Lots has been written about
> the UK too, but I'm not sure about other cultures/countries.
>
> Thanks,
> Sue
>
>
> --
> Sue Gardner
> Executive Director
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> 415 839 6885 office
> 415 816 9967 cell
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
>
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
>
>
> On 24 October 2011 11:16, Daniel and Elizabeth Case
>  wrote:
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Nathan
> > Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 2:13 PM
> > To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?
> >
> > I question whether "college dating" deserves an article to begin with.
> > If it does, which the text of the article doesn't at all establish,
> > the current article has a pretty fatal case of systemic bias.
> >
> >
> >On the surface I tend to agree, but then I read the AfD:
> >
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/College_dating
> >
> > Daniel Case
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Sue Gardner]

Yeah, personally I think the subject is notable. There has been tons
of academic research and popular history written about the history of
dating, college dating, the invention of the 'teenager,' etc. Even
just within the United States.

I think I did a radio series on this once -- IIRC, Beth Bailey was a
really great source. She wrote this fascinating book:
http://www.amazon.com/Front-Porch-Back-Seat-Twentieth-Century/dp/0801839351.
Susan J. Douglas was good too, as well as Stephanie Coontz and Barbara
Ehrenreich. They are all American, though. Lots has been written about
the UK too, but I'm not sure about other cultures/countries.

Thanks,
Sue


--
Sue Gardner
Executive Director
Wikimedia Foundation

415 839 6885 office
415 816 9967 cell

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate



On 24 October 2011 11:16, Daniel and Elizabeth Case
 wrote:
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Nathan
> Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 2:13 PM
> To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?
>
> I question whether "college dating" deserves an article to begin with.
> If it does, which the text of the article doesn't at all establish,
> the current article has a pretty fatal case of systemic bias.
>
>
>    On the surface I tend to agree, but then I read the AfD:
>
>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/College_dating
>
> Daniel Case
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Am I crazy?

[Lady of Shalott]

Thanks! Does someone here have access to the full article at
?

LoS

On 10/24/11, Daniel and Elizabeth Case  wrote:
>
>
> Well, it's not rectified yet. The one source I've given thus far is
> not enough apparently. I have to add more.
>
> Already done:
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/25/nyregion/new-policy-is-aimed-at-preventing-date-rape-on-campuses.html
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=College_dating&diff=457185120&oldid=457178405
>
> Daniel Case
>
>
> ___
> 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] Am I crazy?

[Nathan]

Not convinced by the AfD. "Snow" kept after less than 24 hours, based
on one substantial vote and a bunch of "what he said" votes that
didn't address whether "college dating" is so distinct a phenomena
that it needs to be treated separately from [[dating]]. A search
string of +college +dating is obviously going to return a lot of
results, that doesn't prove notability - and notability isn't the only
concern.

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Daniel and Elizabeth Case]

Well, it's not rectified yet. The one source I've given thus far is
not enough apparently. I have to add more.

Already done:


http://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/25/nyregion/new-policy-is-aimed-at-preventing-date-rape-on-campuses.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=College_dating&diff=457185120&oldid=457178405

Daniel Case 


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Daniel and Elizabeth Case]

-Original Message- 
From: Nathan
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 2:13 PM
To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

I question whether "college dating" deserves an article to begin with.
If it does, which the text of the article doesn't at all establish,
the current article has a pretty fatal case of systemic bias.


On the surface I tend to agree, but then I read the AfD:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/College_dating

Daniel Case



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Nathan]

I question whether "college dating" deserves an article to begin with.
If it does, which the text of the article doesn't at all establish,
the current article has a pretty fatal case of systemic bias.

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Béria Lima]

>
> *It would not have to be a gender related issue for this to occur.*
>

Fred is right in that point. I'm not a gender editor (my articles almost
never have problems with gender issues), however, the topic is one where you
can find the most biased people on earth: Religion.

And I would say you case was not the worst one, the worst case i can imagine
(and already happened with me several times) is to remove biased info (or
include NPOV info) in an article about a religion / god / dogma who is
watched by some believer of the same god / religion. ;)
_
*Béria Lima*
Wikimedia Portugal 
(351) 963 953 042

*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre
acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a
fazer.*


On 24 October 2011 18:54, Fred Bauder  wrote:

> > I've never particularly felt the "boys club" atmosphere on Wikipedia
> > that apparently deters some women. However, I am very angry right now.
> > I tried to add [[date rape]] as a "see also" link to the very
> > incomplete article [[college dating]]. The relevance seemed obvious to
> > me. It was removed by two separate people, and when I took it to the
> > talk page, its relevance was questioned, and I was told to "prove it"
> > because it was "obvious to whom?" Fine. I've proven it with sourcing,
> > adding a small section. I think that needed to happen anyway, but I'm
> > infuriated that I could not just add a see also link to it and tell
> > the students who are really working on the article that a section
> > needed adding. (The people who removed the link are seasoned
> > Wikipedians, not members of the class developing the article.) Am I
> > crazy?
> >
> > LadyofShalott
>
> No, that is the usual reaction of biased editors of all persuasions, to
> throw their mind out of gear, when obvious conclusions which contradict
> their bias are advanced.
>
> It would not have to be a gender related issue for this to occur.
>
> Fred
>
>
> ___
> 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] Am I crazy?

[Lady of Shalott]

Well, it's not rectified yet. The one source I've given thus far is
not enough apparently. I have to add more.

The see also was not merely questioned before, it was removed (with
one edit summary being "seriously, wtf?")

LoS

On 10/24/11, Daniel and Elizabeth Case  wrote:
> It seems this has been rectified the way it should be, IMO: a separate
> section about date rape has been added to the article, with a short,
> reliably sourced graf. This is perfectly in keeping with WP:SEEALSO's dictum
> that such links are fine in a less-developed article as long as the
> intention is to eventually incorporate them into the article (in fact, I
> would amend that passage slightly to suggest that it's even better to start
> such a section yourself or at least bring it up on the talk page in
> conjunction with such an addition).
>
> Daniel Case
>
>
> ___
> 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] Am I crazy?

[Daniel and Elizabeth Case]

It seems this has been rectified the way it should be, IMO: a separate 
section about date rape has been added to the article, with a short, 
reliably sourced graf. This is perfectly in keeping with WP:SEEALSO's dictum 
that such links are fine in a less-developed article as long as the 
intention is to eventually incorporate them into the article (in fact, I 
would amend that passage slightly to suggest that it's even better to start 
such a section yourself or at least bring it up on the talk page in 
conjunction with such an addition).

Daniel Case 


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Fred Bauder]

> I've never particularly felt the "boys club" atmosphere on Wikipedia
> that apparently deters some women. However, I am very angry right now.
> I tried to add [[date rape]] as a "see also" link to the very
> incomplete article [[college dating]]. The relevance seemed obvious to
> me. It was removed by two separate people, and when I took it to the
> talk page, its relevance was questioned, and I was told to "prove it"
> because it was "obvious to whom?" Fine. I've proven it with sourcing,
> adding a small section. I think that needed to happen anyway, but I'm
> infuriated that I could not just add a see also link to it and tell
> the students who are really working on the article that a section
> needed adding. (The people who removed the link are seasoned
> Wikipedians, not members of the class developing the article.) Am I
> crazy?
>
> LadyofShalott

No, that is the usual reaction of biased editors of all persuasions, to
throw their mind out of gear, when obvious conclusions which contradict
their bias are advanced.

It would not have to be a gender related issue for this to occur.

Fred


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Am I crazy?

[Lady of Shalott]

I've never particularly felt the "boys club" atmosphere on Wikipedia
that apparently deters some women. However, I am very angry right now.
I tried to add [[date rape]] as a "see also" link to the very
incomplete article [[college dating]]. The relevance seemed obvious to
me. It was removed by two separate people, and when I took it to the
talk page, its relevance was questioned, and I was told to "prove it"
because it was "obvious to whom?" Fine. I've proven it with sourcing,
adding a small section. I think that needed to happen anyway, but I'm
infuriated that I could not just add a see also link to it and tell
the students who are really working on the article that a section
needed adding. (The people who removed the link are seasoned
Wikipedians, not members of the class developing the article.) Am I
crazy?

LadyofShalott

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap