Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.comwrote: There was an idea brainstormed a little while back with me and a few other folks about seeking funding to have a Wiki Loves Women photography event that wanted photographers to take photographs of women - and this wouldn't be some broad crowdsourced thing like WLM, we would work with photographers, various models etc and make this legit with releases, etc - doing whatever we needed them to be better represented doing, so to say. So, wearing certain articles of clothing (i.e. go go boots), certain make up looks or uses, hairstyles, - places that are often poorly represented regarding women's stuff (i.e. men don't get manicures that often, sorry) even as extreme as sex acts, I also wanted to just have women doing things like mowing the lawn and planting flowers or pan searing salmon or whatever things need videos to represent them (and no, these women wouldn't be nude :P). The latter was inspired by Jenny Geigel Mikulay's work at Alverno College where she had her students (it's a women's college) make films of things like playing drums, the art museum building kinetic architecture time-lapsed, etc. All of these videos have been uploaded to Commons. Someday I'll do it =) I can see it being a project that would be a perfect fit for Kickstarter. Commons' coverage of platform shoes or high-heeled shoes for example is appalling, given the thousands of designer shoes out there: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Platform_shoes http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:High-heeled_shoes Generally, Commons lacks Pinterest ... http://pinterest.com/ ... meaning that the sort of imagery that is characteristic of a women-dominated site like Pinterest is very underrepresented in Commons. As the WMF board resolution last year noted, the situation with model releases for pictures taken in private situations is dire in Commons. So many photos of this type are poached from Flickr without bothering to ask the Flickr account holder for model consent. The best way of showing up the present inadequacies would indeed be to do some work where all the t's are crossed, and all the i's dotted: proper copyright release, proper consent forms. It could be a model to be emulated. Andreas ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On 5/6/12 1:07 PM, Carol Moore DC wrote: On 5/2/2012 9:39 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: Don't miss http://thehairpin.com/2011/01/women-laughing-alone-with-salad Where are women laughing as they chop up bloody sausage... To me I guess I see hostility and dominance in the kind of shots people have been complaining about. I don't think women should respond en masse with the same, but if no one responds at all, I feel it is my duty to mention bloody sausages. Of course, women have responded here, but I guess not enough of a ping in the fabric of world wide male dominance for me to keep my bloody sausages to my self... Hmmm... maybe I should write some of my favorite artists with suggestions Or get rich and commission a bunch of stuff I like... whatever the them... (Handsome male dogs of various breeds on their backs smiling and saying Scratch my belly mommy.) There was an idea brainstormed a little while back with me and a few other folks about seeking funding to have a Wiki Loves Women photography event that wanted photographers to take photographs of women - and this wouldn't be some broad crowdsourced thing like WLM, we would work with photographers, various models etc and make this legit with releases, etc - doing whatever we needed them to be better represented doing, so to say. So, wearing certain articles of clothing (i.e. go go boots), certain make up looks or uses, hairstyles, - places that are often poorly represented regarding women's stuff (i.e. men don't get manicures that often, sorry) even as extreme as sex acts, I also wanted to just have women doing things like mowing the lawn and planting flowers or pan searing salmon or whatever things need videos to represent them (and no, these women wouldn't be nude :P). The latter was inspired by Jenny Geigel Mikulay's work at Alverno College where she had her students (it's a women's college) make films of things like playing drums, the art museum building kinetic architecture time-lapsed, etc. All of these videos have been uploaded to Commons. Someday I'll do it =) I can see it being a project that would be a perfect fit for Kickstarter. Sarah -- *Sarah Stierch* */Wikimedia Foundation Community Fellow/* Mind the gap! Support Wikipedia women's outreach: donate today https://donate.wikimedia.org/ ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Good idea Sarah. Prove everyone in the world we don't even have enough woman in the 9% of editors who can take a picture of some trivial thing. Prove the world the only way to have picture of girls in commons is hiring models and photographers to take them. I have NO idea why no one thought of this before! _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 6 May 2012 14:13, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/6/12 1:07 PM, Carol Moore DC wrote: On 5/2/2012 9:39 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: Don't miss http://thehairpin.com/2011/01/women-laughing-alone-with-salad Where are women laughing as they chop up bloody sausage... To me I guess I see hostility and dominance in the kind of shots people have been complaining about. I don't think women should respond en masse with the same, but if no one responds at all, I feel it is my duty to mention bloody sausages. Of course, women have responded here, but I guess not enough of a ping in the fabric of world wide male dominance for me to keep my bloody sausages to my self... Hmmm... maybe I should write some of my favorite artists with suggestions Or get rich and commission a bunch of stuff I like... whatever the them... (Handsome male dogs of various breeds on their backs smiling and saying Scratch my belly mommy.) There was an idea brainstormed a little while back with me and a few other folks about seeking funding to have a Wiki Loves Women photography event that wanted photographers to take photographs of women - and this wouldn't be some broad crowdsourced thing like WLM, we would work with photographers, various models etc and make this legit with releases, etc - doing whatever we needed them to be better represented doing, so to say. So, wearing certain articles of clothing (i.e. go go boots), certain make up looks or uses, hairstyles, - places that are often poorly represented regarding women's stuff (i.e. men don't get manicures that often, sorry) even as extreme as sex acts, I also wanted to just have women doing things like mowing the lawn and planting flowers or pan searing salmon or whatever things need videos to represent them (and no, these women wouldn't be nude :P). The latter was inspired by Jenny Geigel Mikulay's work at Alverno College where she had her students (it's a women's college) make films of things like playing drums, the art museum building kinetic architecture time-lapsed, etc. All of these videos have been uploaded to Commons. Someday I'll do it =) I can see it being a project that would be a perfect fit for Kickstarter. Sarah -- *Sarah Stierch* *Wikimedia Foundation Community Fellow* Mind the gap! Support Wikipedia women's outreach: donate todayhttps://donate.wikimedia.org/ ___ 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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Excuse me, Beria, but I agree that your tone is, in fact, highly inappropriate. From, Emily On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Béria Lima beria.l...@wikimedia.pt wrote: Sarah, until i tell you to fuck off I'm being respectful to you. Actually the simple meaning of taking time in my volunteer, no paid work as a wikimedian to answer your mail show I respect you. To your idea: Ever heard of OTRS system? I'm sure with all your work for GLAM you already did, so if you have some image you want in commons ask them to release in a compatible license. HIRE someone to take pictures for us is a very idiotic idea, with the full amount of great photographers who take pictures for free to upload on commons, even more, hire the models as well can almost qualify as the most idiot idea ever. I do believe in volunteer work Sarah, which is the basis of our wiki way. Try to get something by paying people to do where you simply don't know if can be done by volunteers - since no one ever asked - is, in my humble opinion, stupid. _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 6 May 2012 14:24, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/6/12 1:20 PM, Béria Lima wrote: Good idea Sarah. Prove everyone in the world we don't even have enough woman in the 9% of editors who can take a picture of some trivial thing. Prove the world the only way to have picture of girls in commons is hiring models and photographers to take them. I have NO idea why no one thought of this before! Beria, I'd appreciate a more respectful tone. As always, with me, and anyone else on this list. The snarkiness of your comment isn't one to make me want to participate or share my brainstorms or ideas on this list. Just because you disagree with my idea, doesn't mean others might find value in it, and it might improve content. Not every woman wants to edit Wikipedia and I have met women who are photographers who have expressed interest in uploading photographs and also women who would rather participate as volunteers to be photographed. Using the term model does not necessarily mean traditional model body types of women. Anyone can be a model if you put them in front of a camera. Again, please be a bit more polite in your responses on this list. I know I'm not the only person who would appreciate that. Thank you, -Sarah _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 6 May 2012 14:13, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/6/12 1:07 PM, Carol Moore DC wrote: On 5/2/2012 9:39 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: Don't miss http://thehairpin.com/2011/01/women-laughing-alone-with-salad Where are women laughing as they chop up bloody sausage... To me I guess I see hostility and dominance in the kind of shots people have been complaining about. I don't think women should respond en masse with the same, but if no one responds at all, I feel it is my duty to mention bloody sausages. Of course, women have responded here, but I guess not enough of a ping in the fabric of world wide male dominance for me to keep my bloody sausages to my self... Hmmm... maybe I should write some of my favorite artists with suggestions Or get rich and commission a bunch of stuff I like... whatever the them... (Handsome male dogs of various breeds on their backs smiling and saying Scratch my belly mommy.) There was an idea brainstormed a little while back with me and a few other folks about seeking funding to have a Wiki Loves Women photography event that wanted photographers to take photographs of women - and this wouldn't be some broad crowdsourced thing like WLM, we would work with photographers, various models etc and make this legit with releases, etc - doing whatever we needed them to be better represented doing, so to say. So, wearing certain articles of clothing (i.e. go go boots), certain make up looks or uses, hairstyles, - places that are often poorly represented regarding women's stuff (i.e. men don't get manicures that often, sorry) even as extreme as sex acts, I also wanted to just have women doing things like mowing the lawn and planting flowers or pan searing salmon or whatever things need videos to represent them (and no, these women wouldn't be nude :P). The latter was inspired by Jenny Geigel Mikulay's work at Alverno College where she had her students (it's a women's college) make films of things like playing drums, the art museum building kinetic architecture time-lapsed, etc. All of these videos have been uploaded to Commons. Someday I'll do it =) I can see it being a project that would be a perfect fit for
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
This is highly inappropriate: http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Beriadiff=3706794oldid=3691439(at that is just the last one, I can give you both a pile bigger than the Everest) And none of you are seing me complain about it. A single mail with irony and you run around claiming misogyny and rudeness? As the meme says: Bitch, pleasehttp://deborahdekrem.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/4f35923e34365_bitch-please.png ! _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 6 May 2012 14:35, Emily Monroe emilymonro...@gmail.com wrote: Excuse me, Beria, but I agree that your tone is, in fact, highly inappropriate. From, Emily On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Béria Lima beria.l...@wikimedia.ptwrote: Sarah, until i tell you to fuck off I'm being respectful to you. Actually the simple meaning of taking time in my volunteer, no paid work as a wikimedian to answer your mail show I respect you. To your idea: Ever heard of OTRS system? I'm sure with all your work for GLAM you already did, so if you have some image you want in commons ask them to release in a compatible license. HIRE someone to take pictures for us is a very idiotic idea, with the full amount of great photographers who take pictures for free to upload on commons, even more, hire the models as well can almost qualify as the most idiot idea ever. I do believe in volunteer work Sarah, which is the basis of our wiki way. Try to get something by paying people to do where you simply don't know if can be done by volunteers - since no one ever asked - is, in my humble opinion, stupid. _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 6 May 2012 14:24, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/6/12 1:20 PM, Béria Lima wrote: Good idea Sarah. Prove everyone in the world we don't even have enough woman in the 9% of editors who can take a picture of some trivial thing. Prove the world the only way to have picture of girls in commons is hiring models and photographers to take them. I have NO idea why no one thought of this before! Beria, I'd appreciate a more respectful tone. As always, with me, and anyone else on this list. The snarkiness of your comment isn't one to make me want to participate or share my brainstorms or ideas on this list. Just because you disagree with my idea, doesn't mean others might find value in it, and it might improve content. Not every woman wants to edit Wikipedia and I have met women who are photographers who have expressed interest in uploading photographs and also women who would rather participate as volunteers to be photographed. Using the term model does not necessarily mean traditional model body types of women. Anyone can be a model if you put them in front of a camera. Again, please be a bit more polite in your responses on this list. I know I'm not the only person who would appreciate that. Thank you, -Sarah _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 6 May 2012 14:13, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/6/12 1:07 PM, Carol Moore DC wrote: On 5/2/2012 9:39 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: Don't miss http://thehairpin.com/2011/01/women-laughing-alone-with-salad Where are women laughing as they chop up bloody sausage... To me I guess I see hostility and dominance in the kind of shots people have been complaining about. I don't think women should respond en masse with the same, but if no one responds at all, I feel it is my duty to mention bloody sausages. Of course, women have responded here, but I guess not enough of a ping in the fabric of world wide male dominance for me to keep my bloody sausages to my self... Hmmm... maybe I should write some of my favorite artists with suggestions Or get rich and commission a bunch of stuff I like... whatever the them... (Handsome male dogs of various breeds on their backs smiling and saying Scratch my belly mommy.) There was an idea brainstormed a little while back with me and a few other folks about seeking funding to have a Wiki Loves Women photography event that wanted photographers to take photographs of women - and this wouldn't be some broad crowdsourced thing like WLM, we would work with photographers, various models etc and make this legit with releases, etc - doing whatever we needed them to be better represented doing, so to say. So, wearing certain articles of clothing (i.e. go go boots), certain make up looks or uses, hairstyles, -
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Of course, that's inappropriate and rude. So were you, but we all know that you know better. From, Emily On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Béria Lima beria.l...@wikimedia.pt wrote: This is highly inappropriate: http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Beriadiff=3706794oldid=3691439(at that is just the last one, I can give you both a pile bigger than the Everest) And none of you are seing me complain about it. A single mail with irony and you run around claiming misogyny and rudeness? As the meme says: Bitch, pleasehttp://deborahdekrem.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/4f35923e34365_bitch-please.png ! _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 6 May 2012 14:35, Emily Monroe emilymonro...@gmail.com wrote: Excuse me, Beria, but I agree that your tone is, in fact, highly inappropriate. From, Emily On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Béria Lima beria.l...@wikimedia.ptwrote: Sarah, until i tell you to fuck off I'm being respectful to you. Actually the simple meaning of taking time in my volunteer, no paid work as a wikimedian to answer your mail show I respect you. To your idea: Ever heard of OTRS system? I'm sure with all your work for GLAM you already did, so if you have some image you want in commons ask them to release in a compatible license. HIRE someone to take pictures for us is a very idiotic idea, with the full amount of great photographers who take pictures for free to upload on commons, even more, hire the models as well can almost qualify as the most idiot idea ever. I do believe in volunteer work Sarah, which is the basis of our wiki way. Try to get something by paying people to do where you simply don't know if can be done by volunteers - since no one ever asked - is, in my humble opinion, stupid. _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 6 May 2012 14:24, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/6/12 1:20 PM, Béria Lima wrote: Good idea Sarah. Prove everyone in the world we don't even have enough woman in the 9% of editors who can take a picture of some trivial thing. Prove the world the only way to have picture of girls in commons is hiring models and photographers to take them. I have NO idea why no one thought of this before! Beria, I'd appreciate a more respectful tone. As always, with me, and anyone else on this list. The snarkiness of your comment isn't one to make me want to participate or share my brainstorms or ideas on this list. Just because you disagree with my idea, doesn't mean others might find value in it, and it might improve content. Not every woman wants to edit Wikipedia and I have met women who are photographers who have expressed interest in uploading photographs and also women who would rather participate as volunteers to be photographed. Using the term model does not necessarily mean traditional model body types of women. Anyone can be a model if you put them in front of a camera. Again, please be a bit more polite in your responses on this list. I know I'm not the only person who would appreciate that. Thank you, -Sarah _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 6 May 2012 14:13, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/6/12 1:07 PM, Carol Moore DC wrote: On 5/2/2012 9:39 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: Don't miss http://thehairpin.com/2011/01/women-laughing-alone-with-salad Where are women laughing as they chop up bloody sausage... To me I guess I see hostility and dominance in the kind of shots people have been complaining about. I don't think women should respond en masse with the same, but if no one responds at all, I feel it is my duty to mention bloody sausages. Of course, women have responded here, but I guess not enough of a ping in the fabric of world wide male dominance for me to keep my bloody sausages to my self... Hmmm... maybe I should write some of my favorite artists with suggestions Or get rich and commission a bunch of stuff I like... whatever the them... (Handsome male dogs of various breeds on their backs smiling and saying Scratch my belly mommy.) There was an idea brainstormed a little while back with me and a few other folks about seeking funding to have a Wiki Loves Women photography event that wanted photographers to take photographs of women - and this wouldn't be some broad crowdsourced thing like WLM, we would work with photographers, various models etc and make this legit with
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
That's a good point. Even here in San Francisco it's much easier to find female nudity in art and advertising than male nudity. I just wish people would stick to commenting on the art instead of the woman's body. Ryan Kaldari On 5/2/12 12:40 AM, Caroline Becker wrote: The problem is, we live in a biased world where you can find much, much more female nudity in fine art musem than male nudity. I'm currently post-treating and uploading pictures from the Museum of Fine Arts of Rennes (France) and the only naked male body is a sculpture of a boy/young teenager playing, while they are lot of naked women, both in sculpture and paintings. Half-naked men are more often corpses than sexy budies. (If you want I can create a gallery with all artworks showing naked or half-naked women). What can I do with that ? Not uploaded pictures of artworks with naked women ? Working harder to have awesome pictures of artworks with naked men ? Caroline 2012/5/2 Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com mailto:petefors...@gmail.com It seems strange to talk about Featured Pictured Candidates as though it is a process, or talk about bias -- from what I could discern when I looked into it last time around, it's basically a system that lets anybody promote their own work, as long as they know how to jump through a couple pretty straightforward hoops and wait a few months. I still think that simply, clearly, *documenting* the process in a practical sense would be a useful first step toward thinking up and building interest in a more refined system. Until somebody puts in the effort to do something like that, we're going to continue to see weird entries on the front page of Commons (and many other projects that use Commons' front page image on their own front page) simply because one person took the initiative to make it happen. Not because the community at Commons made a bad decision. The community didn't make a decision at all. -Pete On May 1, 2012, at 10:23 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: Speaking of gender and nudity, it seems the bias towards female nudity at en.wiki's Featured Picture Candidates is still as strong as ever. And check out the quality comments at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/The_Pearl_and_the_Wave After you guys are finished photographing your all-male cumshots, maybe you could find some nice nude male art to nominate at Featured Picture Candidates. Too bad Robert Mapplethorpe is still copyrighted. Ryan Kaldari On 4/28/12 12:17 AM, Paolo Massa wrote: If you are curious about the images used in the same article on other language editions of Wikipedia you can use Manypedia. For the page Cumshot, it seems currently the same image is used on all language editions, while the Spanish one uses one more image http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|es http://www.manypedia.com/#%7Cen%7CCumshot%7Ces and the Japanese a different additional one. http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|ja http://www.manypedia.com/#%7Cen%7CCumshot%7Cja Of course this is not to say that if all language editions of Wikipedia represent the same concept using the same images, this is the best way of representing it. But at least you can appreciate differences in representations of different language communities. For example see the page Underwear on English and Arabic Wikipedia, http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Underwear|ar http://www.manypedia.com/#%7Cen%7CUnderwear%7Car Hope it helps. On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Emily Monroeemilymonro...@gmail.com mailto:emilymonro...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure the technical term for it either, but the laymen's term is female ejactulation. *shrugs* From, Emily On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Carol Moore DCcarolmoor...@verizon.net mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: I could have a go again, Carol.:) Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles. Andreas So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas surmised, I meant re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one that's male on male. Go for it! As for female ejaculation since ejaculation is putting out sperm, I don't think women do it. Women obviously -- geez, I don't what you call it besides get wet. And maybe orgasms squeeze some of it out an orifice. But I don't think that's ejaculation. But I do now know I don't what the technical terms are or if there are any!! CM ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Is there a perception bias here? There are many many fine art nudes of men in existence. And if you look at the body of work for nude sculpture then many are male - Pope Pius IX was so enraged by this he even went around sticking fig leaves over all the cocks in the vatican*, an utter travesty in art. If you wander around the Louvre you will see lots of nude men on display. Modern advertising? Again perception bias I think - buy any girly mag (and I've been subjected to many) and they are littered with pictures of half-dressed blokes. Case in point; the famous image of Beckham in very small undies. One of my friends in advertising likes to say something along the lines of well one good thing you can say about this industry; at the very least we are not sexists. Nude people are popular pretty much in general :) Tom * ahem, that might be construed wrongly :S On 2 May 2012 17:55, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: ** That's a good point. Even here in San Francisco it's much easier to find female nudity in art and advertising than male nudity. I just wish people would stick to commenting on the art instead of the woman's body. Ryan Kaldari On 5/2/12 12:40 AM, Caroline Becker wrote: The problem is, we live in a biased world where you can find much, much more female nudity in fine art musem than male nudity. I'm currently post-treating and uploading pictures from the Museum of Fine Arts of Rennes (France) and the only naked male body is a sculpture of a boy/young teenager playing, while they are lot of naked women, both in sculpture and paintings. Half-naked men are more often corpses than sexy budies. (If you want I can create a gallery with all artworks showing naked or half-naked women). What can I do with that ? Not uploaded pictures of artworks with naked women ? Working harder to have awesome pictures of artworks with naked men ? Caroline 2012/5/2 Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com It seems strange to talk about Featured Pictured Candidates as though it is a process, or talk about bias -- from what I could discern when I looked into it last time around, it's basically a system that lets anybody promote their own work, as long as they know how to jump through a couple pretty straightforward hoops and wait a few months. I still think that simply, clearly, *documenting* the process in a practical sense would be a useful first step toward thinking up and building interest in a more refined system. Until somebody puts in the effort to do something like that, we're going to continue to see weird entries on the front page of Commons (and many other projects that use Commons' front page image on their own front page) simply because one person took the initiative to make it happen. Not because the community at Commons made a bad decision. The community didn't make a decision at all. -Pete On May 1, 2012, at 10:23 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: Speaking of gender and nudity, it seems the bias towards female nudity at en.wiki's Featured Picture Candidates is still as strong as ever. And check out the quality comments at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/The_Pearl_and_the_Wave After you guys are finished photographing your all-male cumshots, maybe you could find some nice nude male art to nominate at Featured Picture Candidates. Too bad Robert Mapplethorpe is still copyrighted. Ryan Kaldari On 4/28/12 12:17 AM, Paolo Massa wrote: If you are curious about the images used in the same article on other language editions of Wikipedia you can use Manypedia. For the page Cumshot, it seems currently the same image is used on all language editions, while the Spanish one uses one more image http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|es and the Japanese a different additional one. http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|ja Of course this is not to say that if all language editions of Wikipedia represent the same concept using the same images, this is the best way of representing it. But at least you can appreciate differences in representations of different language communities. For example see the page Underwear on English and Arabic Wikipedia, http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Underwear|ar Hope it helps. On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Emily Monroeemilymonro...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure the technical term for it either, but the laymen's term is female ejactulation. *shrugs* From, Emily On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: I could have a go again, Carol.:) Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles. Andreas So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas surmised, I meant re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one that's male on male. Go for it! As for female ejaculation since ejaculation is putting out sperm, I don't
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Advertising not sexist. Really. I realize this is a tangent, but if I am going to see cumshot in my email list a few more times, I might as well join in. Hi all! Heather On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.comwrote: Is there a perception bias here? There are many many fine art nudes of men in existence. And if you look at the body of work for nude sculpture then many are male - Pope Pius IX was so enraged by this he even went around sticking fig leaves over all the cocks in the vatican*, an utter travesty in art. If you wander around the Louvre you will see lots of nude men on display. Modern advertising? Again perception bias I think - buy any girly mag (and I've been subjected to many) and they are littered with pictures of half-dressed blokes. Case in point; the famous image of Beckham in very small undies. One of my friends in advertising likes to say something along the lines of well one good thing you can say about this industry; at the very least we are not sexists. Nude people are popular pretty much in general :) Tom * ahem, that might be construed wrongly :S On 2 May 2012 17:55, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: ** That's a good point. Even here in San Francisco it's much easier to find female nudity in art and advertising than male nudity. I just wish people would stick to commenting on the art instead of the woman's body. Ryan Kaldari On 5/2/12 12:40 AM, Caroline Becker wrote: The problem is, we live in a biased world where you can find much, much more female nudity in fine art musem than male nudity. I'm currently post-treating and uploading pictures from the Museum of Fine Arts of Rennes (France) and the only naked male body is a sculpture of a boy/young teenager playing, while they are lot of naked women, both in sculpture and paintings. Half-naked men are more often corpses than sexy budies. (If you want I can create a gallery with all artworks showing naked or half-naked women). What can I do with that ? Not uploaded pictures of artworks with naked women ? Working harder to have awesome pictures of artworks with naked men ? Caroline 2012/5/2 Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com It seems strange to talk about Featured Pictured Candidates as though it is a process, or talk about bias -- from what I could discern when I looked into it last time around, it's basically a system that lets anybody promote their own work, as long as they know how to jump through a couple pretty straightforward hoops and wait a few months. I still think that simply, clearly, *documenting* the process in a practical sense would be a useful first step toward thinking up and building interest in a more refined system. Until somebody puts in the effort to do something like that, we're going to continue to see weird entries on the front page of Commons (and many other projects that use Commons' front page image on their own front page) simply because one person took the initiative to make it happen. Not because the community at Commons made a bad decision. The community didn't make a decision at all. -Pete On May 1, 2012, at 10:23 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: Speaking of gender and nudity, it seems the bias towards female nudity at en.wiki's Featured Picture Candidates is still as strong as ever. And check out the quality comments at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/The_Pearl_and_the_Wave After you guys are finished photographing your all-male cumshots, maybe you could find some nice nude male art to nominate at Featured Picture Candidates. Too bad Robert Mapplethorpe is still copyrighted. Ryan Kaldari On 4/28/12 12:17 AM, Paolo Massa wrote: If you are curious about the images used in the same article on other language editions of Wikipedia you can use Manypedia. For the page Cumshot, it seems currently the same image is used on all language editions, while the Spanish one uses one more image http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|es and the Japanese a different additional one. http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|ja Of course this is not to say that if all language editions of Wikipedia represent the same concept using the same images, this is the best way of representing it. But at least you can appreciate differences in representations of different language communities. For example see the page Underwear on English and Arabic Wikipedia, http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Underwear|ar Hope it helps. On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Emily Monroeemilymonro...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure the technical term for it either, but the laymen's term is female ejactulation. *shrugs* From, Emily On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: I could have a go again, Carol.:) Gay porn is underrepresented in these
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Advertising not sexist. Really. Well I'd be interested to hear rational arguments that it is... I've always found advertising to be highly sexualised, but refreshingly free of sexism. Tom ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On May 2, 2012, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Morton wrote: Advertising not sexist. Really. Well I'd be interested to hear rational arguments that it is... I've always found advertising to be highly sexualised, but refreshingly free of sexism. You're kidding, right? Advertising is so jam-loaded with sexism, it's hard to know where to start. Just about every advert plays on stereotypes. When's the last time you saw a guy cleaning kitchens in TV ads? Or a woman buying cars? Yes, there are exceptions but they're pretty thin on the ground. Oh, and hello everyone! I'm User:Alison from enwiki and Commons :) -- Allie ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes: http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water Ryan Kaldari On 5/2/12 2:20 PM, Thomas Morton wrote: Advertising not sexist. Really. Well I'd be interested to hear rational arguments that it is... I've always found advertising to be highly sexualised, but refreshingly free of sexism. Tom ___ 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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On 2 May 2012 22:22, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: On May 2, 2012, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Morton wrote: I've always found advertising to be highly sexualised, but refreshingly free of sexism. I tend to agree with Heather...this strains credibility. It's hard to know whether to take this statement seriously. Seriously? I mean, I don't want to derail this discussion further, but as someone who responds fairly equally to nudey boys and girls both are very visibly in use in advertising. Although; Alison raises a point about stereotypes that I didn't really think about :) as the discussion was about the relative numbers of nudey genders... in terms of playing on *stereotypes*, sure, it can be sexist to men and women. Tom ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On 2 May 2012 22:27, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: ** Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes: http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water Ryan Kaldari *sigh* well I entirely agree with Alison's point. But that one is definitely perception bias. The OMG I can't drink water thing is equally misused for guys and girls. Usdually for a boy they have their top off too (I have a trashy mag in front of me now that includes two such images). Tom p.s. just to equalise things.. ;) http://www.lexiebond.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/milk.jpg ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes: http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water Seriously though, it doesn't seem that controversial to say that mainstream advertising heavily skews to female nudity. Next time you pass a magazine stand, count the number of covers with female nudity and male nudity. I'll bet you a wiki-beer it's greater than 2 to 1. Judging by the last time I was in Paris, I would guess 10 to 1. Ryan Kaldari On 5/2/12 2:28 PM, Thomas Morton wrote: On 2 May 2012 22:22, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com mailto:petefors...@gmail.com wrote: On May 2, 2012, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Morton wrote: I've always found advertising to be highly sexualised, but refreshingly free of sexism. I tend to agree with Heather...this strains credibility. It's hard to know whether to take this statement seriously. Seriously? I mean, I don't want to derail this discussion further, but as someone who responds fairly equally to nudey boys and girls both are very visibly in use in advertising. Although; Alison raises a point about stereotypes that I didn't really think about :) as the discussion was about the relative numbers of nudey genders... in terms of playing on /stereotypes/, sure, it can be sexist to men and women. Tom ___ 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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On 2 May 2012 22:36, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: ** Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes: http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water Seriously though, it doesn't seem that controversial to say that mainstream advertising heavily skews to female nudity. Next time you pass a magazine stand, count the number of covers with female nudity and male nudity. I'll bet you a wiki-beer it's greater than 2 to 1. Judging by the last time I was in Paris, I would guess 10 to 1. Ryan Kaldari On the principle of genuine interest I will take you up on that challenge :) and will report back tomorrow. Tom ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On 5/2/12 2:38 PM, Thomas Morton wrote: On 2 May 2012 22:36, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org mailto:rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes: http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water Seriously though, it doesn't seem that controversial to say that mainstream advertising heavily skews to female nudity. Next time you pass a magazine stand, count the number of covers with female nudity and male nudity. I'll bet you a wiki-beer it's greater than 2 to 1. Judging by the last time I was in Paris, I would guess 10 to 1. Ryan Kaldari On the principle of genuine interest I will take you up on that challenge :) and will report back tomorrow. Tom I'll be very happy to be proven wrong. I'm certainly subject to perception bias, but perception isn't always wrong. Don't forget to take a cell-phone photo if you want to collect your wiki-beer :) Ryan Kaldari ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Wonderful. Don't miss http://thehairpin.com/2011/01/women-laughing-alone-with-salad Andreas On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote: ** Perfect opportunity to share one of my favorite blog memes: http://thehairpin.com/2011/11/women-struggling-to-drink-water Ryan Kaldari On 5/2/12 2:20 PM, Thomas Morton wrote: Advertising not sexist. Really. Well I'd be interested to hear rational arguments that it is... I've always found advertising to be highly sexualised, but refreshingly free of sexism. Tom ___ 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 ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Speaking of gender and nudity, it seems the bias towards female nudity at en.wiki's Featured Picture Candidates is still as strong as ever. And check out the quality comments at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/The_Pearl_and_the_Wave After you guys are finished photographing your all-male cumshots, maybe you could find some nice nude male art to nominate at Featured Picture Candidates. Too bad Robert Mapplethorpe is still copyrighted. Ryan Kaldari On 4/28/12 12:17 AM, Paolo Massa wrote: If you are curious about the images used in the same article on other language editions of Wikipedia you can use Manypedia. For the page Cumshot, it seems currently the same image is used on all language editions, while the Spanish one uses one more image http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|es and the Japanese a different additional one. http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|ja Of course this is not to say that if all language editions of Wikipedia represent the same concept using the same images, this is the best way of representing it. But at least you can appreciate differences in representations of different language communities. For example see the page Underwear on English and Arabic Wikipedia, http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Underwear|ar Hope it helps. On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Emily Monroeemilymonro...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure the technical term for it either, but the laymen's term is female ejactulation. *shrugs* From, Emily On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Carol Moore DCcarolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: I could have a go again, Carol.:) Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles. Andreas So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas surmised, I meant re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one that's male on male. Go for it! As for female ejaculation since ejaculation is putting out sperm, I don't think women do it. Women obviously -- geez, I don't what you call it besides get wet. And maybe orgasms squeeze some of it out an orifice. But I don't think that's ejaculation. But I do now know I don't what the technical terms are or if there are any!! CM ___ 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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 12:22 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: No one here has commented on the fact that the German Wikipedia article uses a special, local version of one of Seedfeeder's images. The German version is more amateurish, and a little more nasty. Compare: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Wiki-facial_cumshot.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wiki-cumshot.png I noticed that. However, the German article focuses on the use in pornography, and the nastier image is more appropriate in that setting. Personally, I thought the extra bit of nastiness unnecessary (especially combined with the lack of drawing expertise in execution). The English article about [[Cum shot]] drifts into areas that are more sexuality than pornography, often reproducing content which is on [[Facial (sex act)]]. German Wikipedia doesnt appear to have an article about the sexual act. A cumshot is not a sexual act, but a photographic recording of a sexual act (shot refers to the photography, not the ejaculation). Andreas ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
This is a great idea. We'll see if the bleating that the image is educational is quite so strong if it's male-on-male ;-) On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Carol Moore DC carolmoor...@verizon.netwrote: On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: I could have a go again, Carol. :) Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles. Andreas So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas surmised, I meant re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one that's male on male. Go for it! As for female ejaculation since ejaculation is putting out sperm, I don't think women do it. Women obviously -- geez, I don't what you call it besides get wet. And maybe orgasms squeeze some of it out an orifice. But I don't think that's ejaculation. But I do now know I don't what the technical terms are or if there are any!! CM ___ 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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
As far as I remember the nake-hub of commons (As i call it) has no problem at all with homosexuality. Who has the problem is the other side of commons, the puritans (several here in that list) who cant see a naked picture - wherever is there is a man, a woman, a hetero sex relation, a gay or lesbian one. PS.: I just don't do the draw myself because I don't have the skills to do it. _ *Béria Lima* *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos* On 29 April 2012 21:19, Michelle Gallaway mgalla...@gmail.com wrote: This is a great idea. We'll see if the bleating that the image is educational is quite so strong if it's male-on-male ;-) On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Carol Moore DC carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: I could have a go again, Carol. :) Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles. Andreas So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas surmised, I meant re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one that's male on male. Go for it! As for female ejaculation since ejaculation is putting out sperm, I don't think women do it. Women obviously -- geez, I don't what you call it besides get wet. And maybe orgasms squeeze some of it out an orifice. But I don't think that's ejaculation. But I do now know I don't what the technical terms are or if there are any!! CM ___ 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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
If you are curious about the images used in the same article on other language editions of Wikipedia you can use Manypedia. For the page Cumshot, it seems currently the same image is used on all language editions, while the Spanish one uses one more image http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|es and the Japanese a different additional one. http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|ja Of course this is not to say that if all language editions of Wikipedia represent the same concept using the same images, this is the best way of representing it. But at least you can appreciate differences in representations of different language communities. For example see the page Underwear on English and Arabic Wikipedia, http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Underwear|ar Hope it helps. On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Emily Monroe emilymonro...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure the technical term for it either, but the laymen's term is female ejactulation. *shrugs* From, Emily On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: I could have a go again, Carol. :) Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles. Andreas So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas surmised, I meant re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one that's male on male. Go for it! As for female ejaculation since ejaculation is putting out sperm, I don't think women do it. Women obviously -- geez, I don't what you call it besides get wet. And maybe orgasms squeeze some of it out an orifice. But I don't think that's ejaculation. But I do now know I don't what the technical terms are or if there are any!! CM ___ 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 -- -- Paolo Massa Email: paolo AT gnuband DOT org Blog: http://gnuband.org ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: No one here has commented on the fact that the German Wikipedia article uses a special, local version of one of Seedfeeder's images. The German version is more amateurish, and a little more nasty. Compare: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Wiki-facial_cumshot.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wiki-cumshot.png I noticed that. However, the German article focuses on the use in pornography, and the nastier image is more appropriate in that setting. The English article about [[Cum shot]] drifts into areas that are more sexuality than pornography, often reproducing content which is on [[Facial (sex act)]]. German Wikipedia doesnt appear to have an article about the sexual act. -- John Vandenberg ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
While the picture could be described as somewhat pornographic, I'll have to agree with previous participants in this email conversation. This article IS porn-related, so a pornographic cartoon can be used to illustrate it, per WP:NOTCENSORED. From, Emily On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmoor...@verizon.netwrote: NO need to censor it. Just do a second one with bushier eyebrows and a goatee and put that up instead :-) On 4/27/2012 1:50 PM, Béria Lima wrote: Katrin, I hate to be captain obvious here, but: Do you know that cun shot is a porn related term right? Only used in Porn related articles (see related articleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Cum_shot)? And that what is in the article isn't a picture, but a illustration? I do agreed when people complained about the naked gardening article and pic, because isn't a sex related article. But this IS a sex related article, not only, this one is a PORN related article. Is not like someone will fall there accidentally by looking for Jesus or Santa. Therefore, I don't see the reason to censor the article. *Béria Lima* ___ 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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Perhaps the conversation should be more about equal representation of gender in articles like this... Just a thought :) Sarah Sent via iPhone - I apologize in advance for my shortness or errors! :) On Apr 27, 2012, at 3:33 PM, Emily Monroe emilymonro...@gmail.com wrote: While the picture could be described as somewhat pornographic, I'll have to agree with previous participants in this email conversation. This article IS porn-related, so a pornographic cartoon can be used to illustrate it, per WP:NOTCENSORED. From, Emily On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: NO need to censor it. Just do a second one with bushier eyebrows and a goatee and put that up instead :-) On 4/27/2012 1:50 PM, Béria Lima wrote: Katrin, I hate to be captain obvious here, but: Do you know that cun shot is a porn related term right? Only used in Porn related articles (see related articles)? And that what is in the article isn't a picture, but a illustration? I do agreed when people complained about the naked gardening article and pic, because isn't a sex related article. But this IS a sex related article, not only, this one is a PORN related article. Is not like someone will fall there accidentally by looking for Jesus or Santa. Therefore, I don't see the reason to censor the article. Béria Lima ___ 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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
I could have a go again, Carol. :) Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles. Andreas On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:27 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmoor...@verizon.netwrote: NO need to censor it. Just do a second one with bushier eyebrows and a goatee and put that up instead :-) On 4/27/2012 1:50 PM, Béria Lima wrote: Katrin, I hate to be captain obvious here, but: Do you know that cun shot is a porn related term right? Only used in Porn related articles (see related articleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Cum_shot)? And that what is in the article isn't a picture, but a illustration? I do agreed when people complained about the naked gardening article and pic, because isn't a sex related article. But this IS a sex related article, not only, this one is a PORN related article. Is not like someone will fall there accidentally by looking for Jesus or Santa. Therefore, I don't see the reason to censor the article. *Béria Lima* ___ 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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
I agree with what Beria says here. And I think it's a very important distinction, especially when comparing to Sue's blog post. Sue's post was about the article pregnancy -- not an article about pornography. On a personal level, I happen to agree with you that there's lots of pornographic material on Wikipedia that doesn't really advance its status as an encyclopedia. If I had the luxury of designing Wikipedia myself, it probably wouldn't have an article on cumshot. But our personal opinions are not really the point. What you're proposing, to delete such an image, goes pretty strongly against long-standing ideas about what Wikipedia is. I wouldn't suggest taking on an effort to make such a change without a great deal of effort to absorb the related discussions over the years, and thinking carefully about what new ideas you might have to bring to the discussion that hasn't been discussed before. -Pete On Apr 27, 2012, at 10:50 AM, Béria Lima wrote: Katrin, I hate to be captain obvious here, but: Do you know that cun shot is a porn related term right? Only used in Porn related articles (see related articles)? And that what is in the article isn't a picture, but a illustration? I do agreed when people complained about the naked gardening article and pic, because isn't a sex related article. But this IS a sex related article, not only, this one is a PORN related article. Is not like someone will fall there accidentally by looking for Jesus or Santa. Therefore, I don't see the reason to censor the article. Béria Lima Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho. On 27 April 2012 08:51, Katrin Rönicke kat...@yahoo.de wrote: Hey everybody, a friend of mine sent me a notice: the Wikipedia article Cumshot has a picture which in my humble opinion is nothing else than pornography. once again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumshot I already tried to delete it from the German Wikipedia - but its being restored immediately ... there has already been a great discussion about it in the German Wikipedia (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Cumshot) and its the usual thing: moralty, a narrowed mind and everything is being used against critics of the picture... http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Cumshot its almost the same in the English Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cum_shot arguing you need to have it, because it's an encyclopedia - to me seems really bizarre. I really doubt, that there is ANY need for a picture in articles like this one. I really doubt if there is ANY need of the article... but I would be able to get along with it. accept it. especially if it has - like the English one has, the German one not - a more deeper view of the intellectual discussion, like the critique of Dworkin und the answer of Moore. (And I really like to have this in the German Wikipedia too - when i find the time, I'm going to edit it). So what do you think could be done, that articles like this are not seen as an invitation and perfect explanation for using pornographic pictures... ? Maybe we can come back to some points Sue Gardner made several Months ago (talking about the picture of the naked woman in the pregnancy article): What are the quality-rules we want to have for Wikipedia, to make it an encyclopedia? what kind of picturing does a good encyclopedia need - which not? Maybe the best way of discussing such issues really is from a neutral point of view and generally discussed for all kinds of pictures - not only those few pornographic examples. Katrin --- mailto:kat...@fraulila.de Frau Lila - Feministische Initiative Katrin-Roenicke.de Meine Kolumne beim Freitag Hilfskraft am Lehrstuhl für Politische Theorie ___ 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 Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com 503-383-9454 mobile ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On 27 April 2012 20:54, Béria Lima beria.l...@wikimedia.pt wrote: *Perhaps the conversation should be more about equal representation of gender in articles like this...* Should I ask what the appropriate equal representation in this case might be? Female to male.ejaculation? _ I guess Male on Male. Although in this case that is probably undue because it isn't all that common in gay pornography (YMMV). Tom ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
A Google image search for gay cumshot indicates there are 37.8 million results. Cumshot -gay has 44 million. If these numbers are correct, then gay and non-gay cumshots are almost equally common online, and it's a toss-up (pun intended) as to which we should use. There are really two separate issues here. One is that Wikipedia illustrates sexual and pornographic practices that most educational sources would not. For example, I have yet to find a medical website that illustrates its article on ejaculation with an ejaculation video, or a printed encyclopedia that shows a photograph of ejaculation. So while Wikipedia usually says that due weight should derive from practices in reliable sources, in this particular case Wikipedia departs very sharply from practices in reliable sources, because it understands WP:NOTCENSORED to override WP:NPOV. In other words, it assumes that reliable sources are censored, and that Wikipedia is not. That is not my understanding of policy, nor is it the understanding of policy as written, where WP:NPOV / WP:DUE is the senior and WP:NOTCENSORED is the junior policy, but in practice, WP:NOTCENSORED tends to win out over WP:NPOV and WP:DUE because of our demographics. So that is our status quo. The other issue is that Wikipedia in practice IS censored by not illustrating any of the articles on pornographic terms of art that apply to both gay and straight porn genres with images taken from gay porn, even though, as we can see, both are published in almost equal numbers. One reason is that User:Seedfeeder, the artist who drew most of these images, is straight and usually declined requests to draw gay images (he has done one or two, but it isn't what he enjoys doing). http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles/Seedfeeder I did once convert one of Seedfeeder's images (of snowballing) so the recipient of the semen was a male, rather than a female, because that was actually what the sourced text was calling for. And I confess it did give me a certain satisfaction to see male users complain that the image was disgusting, and demanding that it show the woman receiving. So far, however, no woman has complained. The German article still has it wrong by the way, as it confounds snowballing with cum swapping; they are different activities. Snowballing originates in gay sex and is when the (male or female) recipient spits the semen back into the donor's mouth after oral sex. Cum swapping is primarily a pornographic practice, where one woman spits the semen into another woman's mouth; it never touches a man's lips. Andreas On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: On 27 April 2012 20:54, Béria Lima beria.l...@wikimedia.pt wrote: *Perhaps the conversation should be more about equal representation of gender in articles like this...* Should I ask what the appropriate equal representation in this case might be? Female to male.ejaculation? _ I guess Male on Male. Although in this case that is probably undue because it isn't all that common in gay pornography (YMMV). Tom ___ 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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Hi Andreas Some observations- On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: A Google image search for gay cumshot indicates there are 37.8 million results. Cumshot -gay has 44 million. If these numbers are correct, then gay and non-gay cumshots are almost equally common online, and it's a toss-up (pun intended) as to which we should use. Let me explain a bit here on how search terms works, this problem is actually confounded when dealing with image searches than regular searches. Gay and cumshot or even -gay would be separate search terms, the results would be optimized by the relation between the first and second term. I recall hearing a seminar about how google search algorithms work for this stuff, but can't remember the exact explanation. For reference there are 78 million results for just cumshot, I don't think half of those would be characterized as Gay. Also, the way these images are characterized might have nothing to do with the content, quiet like commons, completely unrelated sketches, drawings, non-nude photos can be tagged along those lines. The only way to say this discrepancy is related with any amount of certainty, is to look through all the results. There is also the other point, Google has multiple filter settings, and images far more graphic than the one on Wikipedia, show up on all of them. With moderate search filter, the result for cumshot drops from 78 million to 128,000. And they are quite graphic from the first set. There are really two separate issues here. One is that Wikipedia illustrates sexual and pornographic practices that most educational sources would not. For example, I have yet to find a medical website that illustrates its article on ejaculation with an ejaculation video, or a printed encyclopedia that shows a photograph of ejaculation. So while Wikipedia usually says that due weight should derive from practices in reliable sources, in this particular case Wikipedia departs very sharply from practices in reliable sources, because it understands WP:NOTCENSORED to override WP:NPOV. In other words, it assumes that reliable sources are censored, and that Wikipedia is not. My argument is, that it is the limitation of conventional encyclopedias. Wikipedia is potentially unlimited, go and create an article to your heart's content, if it valuable to even 5 people, it will probably not be deleted. Talking about the article in question - it stats with an appropriate description about the what it means, followed by origin and explanation of terminology, cites multiple studies by Universities and researchers, then follows up with Health-risks associated and a large section about criticisms, with respected writers, columnists, speakers, weighing in on the topic. I actually found relevant information in that article, complete with an image, medical facts, opinions, all cited and neatly arranged, I don't think it would be helpful for a someone not aware of the term, to listen to a term, and go look at images of cumshot through google, without knowing all the relevant information about it as well. I don't think most encyclopedias can produce this well researched article on a relatively taboo section. I would rather read, the encyclopedic/informative part of the a sex act there, then go to Google image to see what it looks like, or urbandictionary or some seedy site with nothing relevant besides a depiction. In your analogy about a medical website depicting, ejaculation, it is really not in the same league as Wikipedia. Wikipedia, is for general reference, medical websites are usually very specific, they would only depict, and I assure you they do depict far more graphic content than commons can handle, if it is medically relevant. That is not my understanding of policy, nor is it the understanding of policy as written, where WP:NPOV / WP:DUE is the senior and WP:NOTCENSORED is the junior policy, but in practice, WP:NOTCENSORED tends to win out over WP:NPOV and WP:DUE because of our demographics. So that is our status quo. The other issue is that Wikipedia in practice IS censored by not illustrating any of the articles on pornographic terms of art that apply to both gay and straight porn genres with images taken from gay porn, even though, as we can see, both are published in almost equal numbers. One reason is that User:Seedfeeder, the artist who drew most of these images, is straight and usually declined requests to draw gay images (he has done one or two, but it isn't what he enjoys doing). http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles/Seedfeeder I actually like Seedfeeder (along with several others ) and appreciate his work. He provides alternatives, to graphic images, and screen-grabs to depict sex-acts and topics, that might be important to explain the act itself. I have never interacted with him, but he's really not the type to shy away from depicting gay acts, he has already illustrated several as
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 5:56 AM, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: On 27 April 2012 20:54, Béria Lima beria.l...@wikimedia.pt wrote: *Perhaps the conversation should be more about equal representation of gender in articles like this...* Should I ask what the appropriate equal representation in this case might be? Female to male.ejaculation? _ I guess Male on Male. Although in this case that is probably undue because it isn't all that common in gay pornography (YMMV). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_ejaculate would be an equivalent. -- twitter: purplepopple blog: ozziesport.com ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
Fun fact: Female ejaculation is the most viewed Wikipedia article related in any way to feminism (at least since WikiProject Feminism started keeping stats). It's 3 times as popular as the next article on the list, Abortion. Ryan Kaldari On 4/27/12 2:52 PM, Laura Hale wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_ejaculate would be an equivalent. -- twitter: purplepopple blog: ozziesport.com http://ozziesport.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] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.orgwrote: ** Fun fact: Female ejaculation is the most viewed Wikipedia article related in any way to feminism (at least since WikiProject Feminism started keeping stats). It's 3 times as popular as the next article on the list, Abortion. Ryan Kaldari On 4/27/12 2:52 PM, Laura Hale wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_ejaculate would be an equivalent. It seems one of the most absurd facts of science to me that the scientific community can agree that stars several light years away are orbited by planets, and how large these planets are, while they cannot agree whether or not female ejaculation exists, and what it is. Andreas ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: I could have a go again, Carol. :) Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles. Andreas So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas surmised, I meant re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one that's male on male. Go for it! As for female ejaculation since ejaculation is putting out sperm, I don't think women do it. Women obviously -- geez, I don't what you call it besides get wet. And maybe orgasms squeeze some of it out an orifice. But I don't think that's ejaculation. But I do now know I don't what the technical terms are or if there are any!! CM ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Article Cumshot in English and German Wikipedia
I'm not sure the technical term for it either, but the laymen's term is female ejactulation. *shrugs* From, Emily On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Carol Moore DC carolmoor...@verizon.netwrote: On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: I could have a go again, Carol. :) Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles. Andreas So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas surmised, I meant re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one that's male on male. Go for it! As for female ejaculation since ejaculation is putting out sperm, I don't think women do it. Women obviously -- geez, I don't what you call it besides get wet. And maybe orgasms squeeze some of it out an orifice. But I don't think that's ejaculation. But I do now know I don't what the technical terms are or if there are any!! CM ___ 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
