Or are aimed at women or minorities not providing the requisite perks to
the shooter.
Coffee Ogress
*gyllyn!*
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 6:07 AM, Bryce Peake <brycepeake(a)gmail.com> wrote:
"The fact that this man killed both a male and a
female former colleague
strongly indicate that his problem was not gender-driven, that it was
driven by the fact that these former colleagues had complained about him in
the past."
Why do we always assume that gender is only a motivation in terms of
victim selection? Shooters' misogyny/masculinity (no, they're not always
the same thing), has been central in every one of these manifestos over the
past decade (or two) regardless of whether the direct object of rage is
transgendered, man, or woman. And yes, race, class and sexuality all *intersect
*with this sense of masculinity, and we need to be taking all three of
these concepts together in thinking about these issues.
Where I think this does connect to Wikipedia is in this weird debate that
always pops up about suicide mass shootings being somehow gender neutral...
despite the fact that the very very vast majority of these types of public
suicide mass shootings are perpetrated by men, and the manifestos mostly
about their sense of being or not being a man.
bryce
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 8:08 AM, JJ Marr <jjmarr(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, exactly. It's probably much more likely
to be race driven than
gender driven, if you look at the reasons for his firing.
I spent most of yesterday NOT looking at the news, making my husband turn
off the TV when the news came on, and not logging in to any online
experience where I was likely to run into video related to this. It is
what I do, as a matter of course, to make it through the day without
triggering the memories of terror I experienced as a result of being
involved in a very violent episode in the past.
This has nothing to do with Wikipedia, Wikimedia or the WMF. The fact
that this man killed both a male and a female former colleague strongly
indicate that his problem was not gender-driven, that it was driven by the
fact that these former colleagues had complained about him in the past.
That people with this sort of sociopathy use gender-specific descriptive
nouns is pretty much irrelevant, and I'm hard-pressed to understand why you
think it important to start a conversation about the utterings of someone
this mentally imbalanced to show that there is a gender gap *anywhere*, let
alone here. This guy was a powder keg, and he was striking out at anyone
whom he believed had caused him harm. I do not believe that his actions
were motivated by sexism.
Risker/Anne
On 27 August 2015 at 03:01, Neotarf <neotarf(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Is there any doubt what this kind of language is
for?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIdrUHKkG6Y
It's not for a collaborative environment, that's for sure.
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap