I wonder if Wikipe-tan is more of a generational issue than a gender one. I'm pretty much as humorless feminist as they come, but being in my early 20s, I grew up with anime and Wikipe-tan is no more disturbing to me in the Wikipedia context than if we had come up with a Disney-style mascot not wearing pants. (Granted, that OS-tans are pretty universally female is undoubtedly a gender issue and the anime style is a legitimate concern as well, but I think it's part of culture at large, not one that Wikimedia can really address.)
I guess my point is that it might be a wash whether Wikipe-tan drives off more older editors who find her offensive than she attracts younger editors who find her friendly and familiar. It's really a side point though. It never occurred to me that Wikipe-tan might be considered embarrassing or inappropriate and I'm finding this conversation eye-opening.
Nepenthe
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Steven Walling <swalling@wikimedia.org> wrote:
On Feb 3, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Daniel and Elizabeth Case wrote:
On Wednesday, February 02, 2011, jidanni@jidanni.org wrote:
K> our "mascot"? An overtly sexualized, large-breasted woman who people
K> regularly draw in bikinis and maid costumes? I mean, I know
K> Wikipe-tan is not actually The Problem. But she's the most egregious
K> example I think we have of the sort of unconscious "boyzone" culture
Ah, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipe-tan .
I had never seen that, and now that I have I find it embarrassing for
Wikipedia.
IIRC Wikipe-tan was only originally meant to be the mascot for WikiProject
Anime and Manga; how she became the avatar for the project as a whole, I
don't know. She's hardly an inclusive or representative figure (I'm not a
anime/manga otaku, aside from the other issues) and we can certainly do
better.
My own personal notes on signs of a "boyzone" culture at Wikipedia: the
appearance of [[Lindsay Lohan]], [[Reese Witherspoon]] and [[Uma Thurman]]
as Main Page FAs within a two-year timespan. And also the one FA that Raul
quite sensibly (IMO) has decided will never be on the Main Page.
In the same category, there's also the discussion from the top of
[[Talk:KaDee Strickland]] downwards, that ensued after that article was on
the Main Page. It's hard for me not to see some of it as misogynistic ...
Daniel Case
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
The whole Wikipe-tan issue isn't limited to Wikipedia itself either. I participate regularly in the Featured Picture process on Wikimedia Commons, and have lately been struggling against media in a similar vein.[1]
There is a substantial editorial debate around fan art like this that is in flux on Commons. On the one hand, it's relatively easy to make the argument that they're not educational media. However, you still get people who in all seriousness support promotion of media like this with comments such as, "I like her big tits." (That's one extreme example, but it's still a direct quote.)
Additional voices would be welcome, especially since Commons is a much smaller community. I think perhaps one of our first commitments should be to filling the informal leadership gap others have mentioned by stepping up and saying what we find to be unacceptable.[2]2. This talk was humorous, but I think there's some truth in the slide: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Steven_Walling_Wikipedia_mascots_-_Ignite_Portland_8_-_Portland_Oregon.jpg
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap