Sarah, thanks
I am focusing my energy on taking action versus
research investment.
fair enough,
the "versus" reads a little strange to me in this context but never mind ;-)
in my view of the matter, and my thanks to Laura for filling in with a few concrete
examples, taking positive
action in this context would mean, I guess, to stop talking about any numbers that we
might have to
consider to be harmful - precisely: harmful for swift and wonderful encouragement for
*positive* action
back to action, then
including research ;-)
Claudia
On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 07:36:10 -0700, Sarah Stierch wrote
Well, I'll be honest:
I don't really care about detailed research unless it shows our numbers
changing at this point :-) (better or worse)...
I am focusing my energy on taking action versus research investment. So
perhaps I shouldn't even bother with this conversation. We all know we
have few women editing :-/
Sar
Sent via iPhone - I apologize in advance for my shortness or errors! :)
On Jun 18, 2012, at 12:07 AM, koltzenburg(a)w4w.net wrote:
> Thank you, Sarah
>
>> Data doesn't equal patriarchy
>
> agree, I was not stipulating this, I am pointing to the philosophy that feeds into
the setup of such an
inquiry
> in the first place
>
>> I trust the survey.
>
> up to you, Sarah
> which part of it do you trust? the outcome given the chosen setup?
> I have to reasons, either, for any doubt about the results
>
> my argument is to take a close look at the setup of any statistics exercise first
and then ask, maybe,
who
> benefits most from the results, and then we are
well into partiarchally inspired politics, I guess,
> anyway, this is the point I am trying to make
>
> the task is, I think, to work on the following:
> which question would yield results that people on this list will feel motivated by
to turn into sustainable
> positive action about a perceived gender gap among Wikipedia editors?
>
>> And having
>> numbers is honestly more powerful than saying "oh most editors are
men."
>
> well, given Risker/Anne's statement
>>>> (most editors do not gender-identify ...
>
> no one knows, right?
> so my argument says that since most editors do not gender-identify, it would be
wrong to say anything,
> really
>
> and hence any study of "gender gap" in Wikipedia (or any other project of
its kind) had better rely on
other
> data than these - which is why I think that in
general such a discussion of basics might be useful for
Laura's
> project, too - I'd say go for it, Laura :-)
>
>> If you'd like to talk to the organizers of the survey, I'm sure
they'd be
>> happy to discuss it.
>
> thank you, yes, you were so kind as to give me the contact data last time I raised
the issue here, for
which
> thanks again
>
> I'd be more happy to discuss the matter more thorougly here first
> - or maybe anyone knows of another public forum which might be interested in this
topic?
>
>> Keep in mind the survey is people stating their gender in the survey
>> itself, not their userspace/account.
>
> indeed, agree,
> and this is precisely why any implicit claims on the relevance of the results should
not be writ large in
our list
> description
>
> let us do away with looking at numbers first... as far as I can glean from
discussions like the ones we do
on
> this list, there is quite ample data other than
numbers that allow us to address the phenomenon of a
> perceived gender gap in Wikipedia et al. and of course then take positive action to
remedy any
perceived
> imbalance
>
> best & cheers
> Claudia
>
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 23:35:14 -0700, Sarah Stierch wrote
>> Keep in mind the survey is people stating their gender in the survey
>> itself, not their userspace/account. When I take the survey I can choose a
>> gender or no response. (and maybe something else..I dont remember and I'm
>> on my phone..) I am sure plenty of people who do not choose gender on
>> their profile choose it anonymously on the profile.
>>
>> I trust the survey. Data doesn't equal patriarchy when it is the community
>> who is choosing to identify their gender in said survey. And having
>> numbers is honestly more powerful than saying "oh most editors are
men."
>>
>> If you'd like to talk to the organizers of the survey, I'm sure
they'd be
>> happy to discuss it.
>>
>> Sarah
>>
>> Sent via iPhone - I apologize in advance for my shortness or errors! :)
>>
>> On Jun 17, 2012, at 11:22 PM, koltzenburg(a)w4w.net wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you Risker/Anne
>>> for this statement which I think is true:
>>>
>>>> (most editors do not gender-identify ...
>>>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2012-June/002876.html
>>>
>>> what follows from this is, in my opinion, that any specific-looking numbers
the Wikimedia Foundation
> (e.g.,
>>> Wikipedia editor survey) chooses to have published about how many women act
as editors should
not
> be
>>> trusted and hence not be perpetuated
>>>
>>> and best not in our list description, either...
>>> "The most recent Wikipedia editor survey indicates that the percentage
of female contributors in
> Wikimedia
>>> projects is approximately nine percent."
>>>
>>> could this starting sentence be changed, maybe, to reflect the fact stated
by Anne/Risker and not
feed
> into
>>> such a seemingly negatively perceived climate in the first place?
>>>
>>> ah, yes, this is me again, trying to raise some awareness also about the
promotional paradoxes in
> results
>>> created by patriarchally-inspired statistics exercises that purport to come
up with facts,
>>> apologies if this makes you groan, maybe again,
>>> I will stick to my point though until I hear better arguments - which,
certainly, I am happy to take
on
this
point
:-) thanks & cheers,
Claudia
koltzenburg(a)w4w.net
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
thanks & cheers,
Claudia
koltzenburg(a)w4w.net
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
thanks & cheers,
Claudia
koltzenburg(a)w4w.net