Re: [Gendergap] coordination work off-wikie
On 11/30/2014 1:36 PM, Risker wrote: Well, hold on. The content dispute that is being described is one that rages within the feminist community (note the lack of gender there - it encompasses people of all genders), and is not a male vs female thing. Often as not, it is women disagreeing on the definitions amongst themselves. The same is true of many topics of interest to women: abortion, marriage, gender identity, etc. Let's not simply dump all of these in the "men vs women" drawer, please. Risker/Anne I don't remember seeing much disagreement on any actual women's or feminist issues on GGTF. Only individuals calling themselves women coming to GGTF (or even more so the Arbitration) to say that Eric Corbett was a great guy and some of us were too uptight about the use of c*nt. And some individuals (like me) were told we posted too much, though the fact I was targeted for harassment over and over again does explain at least 20% of those edits. (When people see one editor targeted, they often will want to quickly distance themselves from that individual.) Please explain what actual issues there was debate about among editors who said they were women?? Section titles would help. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] coordination work off-wikie
This is just opinion. Thank you for ending the conversation. On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Risker wrote: > Well, hold on. The content dispute that is being described is one that > rages within the feminist community (note the lack of gender there - it > encompasses people of all genders), and is not a male vs female thing. > Often as not, it is women disagreeing on the definitions amongst > themselves. The same is true of many topics of interest to women: > abortion, marriage, gender identity, etc. Let's not simply dump all of > these in the "men vs women" drawer, please. > > Risker/Anne > > On 30 November 2014 at 08:12, Kathleen McCook wrote: > >> Yes, one can see easily how they move from topic to topic. Connected and >> ensuring their POV dominates. >> >> The issue of feminism should not be defined by men whose motivation seems >> to be to create an environment where women are "free" to be what they (the >> men discussed here ) imagine to us to be. >> >> I believe that Marie's statements about keeping these issues off one's >> main course are the result of continuous attacks. >> >> Wikipedia needs a TAKE BACK THE NIGHT movement. In my days on campus >> women attacked were told they shouldn't be out at night.So marches began >> to TAKE BACK THE NIGHT. >> >> On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 2:16 AM, JJ Marr wrote: >> >>> To quote you in the context of your dispute over a video, you say "I >>> dispute that it "makes little sense" and why does it even need to add >>> informational value? Why can't it just be to add aesthetics to the article >>> as pictures and videos often are?” I ask why don't you take that dispute up >>> with the editor in question? >>> >>> Also, you need to be more clear in what you are saying. I have no >>> context to this message, and I think it is a complaint about a content >>> dispute. >>> >>> Please explain why this is relevant to the gender gap, since you are >>> sending it out to everyone on the gender gap mailing list, and secondly, >>> why a minor content dispute on enwiki is relevant to the Wikimedia gender >>> gap community as a whole. >>> On Nov 30, 2014 1:47 AM, "Marie Earley" wrote: >>> Not sure if this will produce a new thread or attach to the existing one (I've checked my spam folder, there's nothing there) but anyway Tim: I just wondered whether you regard this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force#Moving_forward ...as a lack of civility or a gender gap issue? In particular this comment: "...As has been indicated on the talk page of the proposed decision, *repeatedly,* there is some question as to exactly *which* women this group seems to be reaching out toward, specifically, whether it is more or less of a more or less radical feminist perspective" I thought it summed up in a nutshell what the GGTF was really up against. It's a kind of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism * Are you now or have you ever been a feminist who believes that sex work is the opposite of feminism? Anyone who answers yes that question is judged to be a "radical", a subversive who wants to push POV and therefore they are fair game. On WP's list of feminists there were a very odd mish-mash of categories of feminist https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_feminists&oldid=544136790 and lots of names missing e.g. Gail Dines. I did a major rewrite to organize it chronologically and it meant that "anti-pornography feminists", "anti-prostitution feminists" and "socialist feminists" could go onto the list https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_feminists&oldid=545667727 The list has recently been changed to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_feminists and I'm working with a couple of editors to see how we can improve it further. I've largely avoided trouble by sticking to admin based work such as this, and similar work: Cleaning up bibliographies, e.g. Joseph Schumpeter, from this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Schumpeter&oldid=633566034#Major_works to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Schumpeter&oldid=634343909#Major_works Creating an article for the International Association for Feminist Economics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Association_for_Feminist_Economics and improving the article for the Human Development and Capability Association https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_and_Capability_Association then creating biographies for past presidents of IAFFE and fellows of the HDCA. Adding DOBs to notable scholars and then adding them to Wiki's calendar (births). These organisations / individuals argues against sex work on the grounds of the perceptio
Re: [Gendergap] coordination work off-wikie
Well, hold on. The content dispute that is being described is one that rages within the feminist community (note the lack of gender there - it encompasses people of all genders), and is not a male vs female thing. Often as not, it is women disagreeing on the definitions amongst themselves. The same is true of many topics of interest to women: abortion, marriage, gender identity, etc. Let's not simply dump all of these in the "men vs women" drawer, please. Risker/Anne On 30 November 2014 at 08:12, Kathleen McCook wrote: > Yes, one can see easily how they move from topic to topic. Connected and > ensuring their POV dominates. > > The issue of feminism should not be defined by men whose motivation seems > to be to create an environment where women are "free" to be what they (the > men discussed here ) imagine to us to be. > > I believe that Marie's statements about keeping these issues off one's > main course are the result of continuous attacks. > > Wikipedia needs a TAKE BACK THE NIGHT movement. In my days on campus women > attacked were told they shouldn't be out at night.So marches began to TAKE > BACK THE NIGHT. > > On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 2:16 AM, JJ Marr wrote: > >> To quote you in the context of your dispute over a video, you say "I >> dispute that it "makes little sense" and why does it even need to add >> informational value? Why can't it just be to add aesthetics to the article >> as pictures and videos often are?” I ask why don't you take that dispute up >> with the editor in question? >> >> Also, you need to be more clear in what you are saying. I have no context >> to this message, and I think it is a complaint about a content dispute. >> >> Please explain why this is relevant to the gender gap, since you are >> sending it out to everyone on the gender gap mailing list, and secondly, >> why a minor content dispute on enwiki is relevant to the Wikimedia gender >> gap community as a whole. >> On Nov 30, 2014 1:47 AM, "Marie Earley" wrote: >> >>> Not sure if this will produce a new thread or attach to the existing >>> one (I've checked my spam folder, there's nothing there) but anyway >>> >>> Tim: I just wondered whether you regard this: >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force#Moving_forward >>> >>> ...as a lack of civility or a gender gap issue? >>> >>> In particular this comment: >>> "...As has been indicated on the talk page of the proposed decision, >>> *repeatedly,* there is some question as to exactly *which* women this >>> group seems to be reaching out toward, specifically, whether it is more or >>> less of a more or less radical feminist perspective" >>> >>> I thought it summed up in a nutshell what the GGTF was really up >>> against. It's a kind of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism >>> * Are you now or have you ever been a feminist who believes that sex >>> work is the opposite of feminism? >>> Anyone who answers yes that question is judged to be a "radical", a >>> subversive who wants to push POV and therefore they are fair game. >>> >>> On WP's list of feminists there were a very odd mish-mash of categories >>> of feminist >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_feminists&oldid=544136790 >>> and lots of names missing e.g. Gail Dines. I did a major rewrite to >>> organize it chronologically and it meant that "anti-pornography feminists", >>> "anti-prostitution feminists" and "socialist feminists" could go onto the >>> list >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_feminists&oldid=545667727 >>> >>> The list has recently been changed to this: >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_feminists and I'm working with a >>> couple of editors to see how we can improve it further. >>> >>> I've largely avoided trouble by sticking to admin based work such as >>> this, and similar work: >>> Cleaning up bibliographies, e.g. Joseph Schumpeter, from this: >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Schumpeter&oldid=633566034#Major_works >>> to this: >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Schumpeter&oldid=634343909#Major_works >>> >>> Creating an article for the International Association for Feminist >>> Economics >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Association_for_Feminist_Economics >>> and improving the article for the Human Development and Capability >>> Association >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_and_Capability_Association >>> then creating biographies for past presidents of IAFFE and fellows of >>> the HDCA. >>> Adding DOBs to notable scholars and then adding them to Wiki's calendar >>> (births). >>> >>> These organisations / individuals argues against sex work on the grounds >>> of the perception of women that is generated (i.e. as a thing / object). >>> The problem with the MRA, pro-porn, pro-sex work POV is they have no >>> problem with anti-porn etc. POV provided it is in a box labelled "mad" or >>> "religious
Re: [Gendergap] coordination work off-wikie
What do you propose a "take back the night" would be like? On Nov 30, 2014 8:12 AM, "Kathleen McCook" wrote: > Yes, one can see easily how they move from topic to topic. Connected and > ensuring their POV dominates. > > The issue of feminism should not be defined by men whose motivation seems > to be to create an environment where women are "free" to be what they (the > men discussed here ) imagine to us to be. > > I believe that Marie's statements about keeping these issues off one's > main course are the result of continuous attacks. > > Wikipedia needs a TAKE BACK THE NIGHT movement. In my days on campus women > attacked were told they shouldn't be out at night.So marches began to TAKE > BACK THE NIGHT. > > On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 2:16 AM, JJ Marr wrote: > >> To quote you in the context of your dispute over a video, you say "I >> dispute that it "makes little sense" and why does it even need to add >> informational value? Why can't it just be to add aesthetics to the article >> as pictures and videos often are?" I ask why don't you take that dispute up >> with the editor in question? >> >> Also, you need to be more clear in what you are saying. I have no context >> to this message, and I think it is a complaint about a content dispute. >> >> Please explain why this is relevant to the gender gap, since you are >> sending it out to everyone on the gender gap mailing list, and secondly, >> why a minor content dispute on enwiki is relevant to the Wikimedia gender >> gap community as a whole. >> On Nov 30, 2014 1:47 AM, "Marie Earley" wrote: >> >>> Not sure if this will produce a new thread or attach to the existing >>> one (I've checked my spam folder, there's nothing there) but anyway >>> >>> Tim: I just wondered whether you regard this: >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force#Moving_forward >>> >>> ...as a lack of civility or a gender gap issue? >>> >>> In particular this comment: >>> "...As has been indicated on the talk page of the proposed decision, >>> *repeatedly,* there is some question as to exactly *which* women this >>> group seems to be reaching out toward, specifically, whether it is more or >>> less of a more or less radical feminist perspective" >>> >>> I thought it summed up in a nutshell what the GGTF was really up >>> against. It's a kind of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism >>> * Are you now or have you ever been a feminist who believes that sex >>> work is the opposite of feminism? >>> Anyone who answers yes that question is judged to be a "radical", a >>> subversive who wants to push POV and therefore they are fair game. >>> >>> On WP's list of feminists there were a very odd mish-mash of categories >>> of feminist >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_feminists&oldid=544136790 >>> and lots of names missing e.g. Gail Dines. I did a major rewrite to >>> organize it chronologically and it meant that "anti-pornography feminists", >>> "anti-prostitution feminists" and "socialist feminists" could go onto the >>> list >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_feminists&oldid=545667727 >>> >>> The list has recently been changed to this: >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_feminists and I'm working with a >>> couple of editors to see how we can improve it further. >>> >>> I've largely avoided trouble by sticking to admin based work such as >>> this, and similar work: >>> Cleaning up bibliographies, e.g. Joseph Schumpeter, from this: >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Schumpeter&oldid=633566034#Major_works >>> to this: >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Schumpeter&oldid=634343909#Major_works >>> >>> Creating an article for the International Association for Feminist >>> Economics >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Association_for_Feminist_Economics >>> and improving the article for the Human Development and Capability >>> Association >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_and_Capability_Association >>> then creating biographies for past presidents of IAFFE and fellows of >>> the HDCA. >>> Adding DOBs to notable scholars and then adding them to Wiki's calendar >>> (births). >>> >>> These organisations / individuals argues against sex work on the grounds >>> of the perception of women that is generated (i.e. as a thing / object). >>> The problem with the MRA, pro-porn, pro-sex work POV is they have no >>> problem with anti-porn etc. POV provided it is in a box labelled "mad" or >>> "religious" with a sub-text that the only people that could possibly >>> support that POV are from the moral right and are probably racist and >>> homophobic as well. The other problem that the MRA have is that, human >>> development and capability, which includes feminist economics / inequality >>> / care work etc. collectively constitutes a 'single broad topic' >>> (WP:SPATG), so they are unable to stop editors, who wish to e
