This is simply, nonsense! Don't you people realize that separating this List
into two distinct ones would underline, reinforce and actually signify the
very "gendergap" you are allegedly trying to resolve. This is people talking
with people. If there is a female or male here who has a problem
communicating with, or in the presence of, another gender - they do have a
problem. But a website Mailing List such as this is not the place to resolve
it.
Marc Riddell
on 3/15/11 11:53 PM, carolmooredc(a)verizon.net at carolmooredc(a)verizon.net
wrote:
Yeah, George! A definite role model for the list; but
with such a common
sense attitude, you should feel free to post a tiny bit more :-)
On 3/14/2011 8:33 PM, George Herbert wrote:
I realize that my replying is in a sense violating what I'm about to
say below, but...
I and some others who are male are here and either listening, or
listening and briefly asking what the women present (and absent) feel
about things and not asserting what you do or should think.
I would appreciate not being locked out of part of the discussion. I
appreciate that doing so necessarily means I should be minimizing my
speaking out, and maximizing my listening, and I hope I've done so
successfully.
That said, if the dynamics here overall have created a list which is
not optimal for encouraging women to participate, which I can clearly
see is possible, I understand your wanting to do something about it.
Two lists as proposed might be necessary.
If this has happened on the list designed to talk about and fix the
problem of that happening... *bang head on the wall* Talk about
frustrating. We're supposed to be the "good guys", literally 8-(
My two cents, and I will now go back to listening.
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap