Why? -----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Pax Ahimsa Gethen Sent: Monday, 16 October 2017 7:21 PM To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine people like myself. I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread: > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's > message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points. > > I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that > this will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for > in the document outlining the competition, and editors involved in > this project will be subject to all expectations of normal editors > (including not mass-producing poor-quality content). > > As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between > describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. > I believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said > can be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid > criticism of poor wording. > > – Molly (GorillaWarfare) > > On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare > <gorillawarfarewikipedia@ gmail.com> wrote: > > Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to > this list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue > with her email address. > > "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some > stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD > everything that comes out of this contest as it is? > > I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women > to a higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia > isn't going to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies > write a bunch of stubs. > > And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's > better than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I > shouldn't have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands." > > – Molly (GorillaWarfare) - Pax aka Funcrunch On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote: > Is that still going on? > > I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia. > I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned > out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, > on women involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of > them. > > But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in > exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration > of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is > sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were > about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the > question just because of what the subject happens to be. > > I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people > sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all > for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in > this thread. > > Todd > > On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" <wikigamal...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite? >> >> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these >> issues. Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping >> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's >> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest >> tones it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and >> apologies are demanded. We've culturally internalized sexism so much >> that even the way we talk about sexism is sexist. >> >> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying >>> to contast is, per se, a clear defeat. >>> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* >>> about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, >>> incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism. -- Pax Ahimsa Gethen | p...@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org | Pronouns: they/them/their _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
