Sarah. As a parting note. You mention how women dislike confrontation.
And yet I find your email incredibly confrontational.
So colour me unconvinced. Ive met plenty of people of either sex who hate
confrontation. And vice versa.
For me I don't view the world divided by gender in the way many on this
list have done.
Which is why I am bowing out because THAT is the true casual sexism we need
to combat.
Tom
On 19 Jul 2013 16:35, "Sarah Stierch" <sarah.stierch(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So..
That means...myself, and about 10 other people or however many have
replied to this saying it is sexist are the .01% of women (and a of men)
who are the absolute minority in feeling it was sexist regardless of the
"level" of sexism. We are that sample. Wow. I can't believe we are all on
this one mailing list! (Smirk)
Most of the comments (maybe all) have been made by Americans, too. So
maybe it's us being the sensitive ones, too. (Slight sarcasm but not) I
know some countries and cultures are more accepting of things like this -
but that doesn't mean it's OK.
I call it "madmen sexism" (a US TV show about rather slimy advertising
execs in the 1960s)...the kind of boardroom humor being made by men in
power for decades.
However well intentioned something is its all about how the person it was
directed at felt. Karen felt it is sexist.
So just accept it and stop the patronizing kindness and telling the person
who experienced the uncomfortable situation most men will never experience
how to "deal" with it better. Your emails, no matter how many smiley faces,
have lecturing tones of a father telling his "sensitive" daughter how to
cope with a delicate flower of a boy who said something inappropriate in
the classroom. This is something that is so painful for me, no matter how
"good faith."
Also, research has shown that many women hate confrontation. We hate it.
The idea of going to someone who has made me uncomfortable and said
something that made me feel uncomfortable makes me so...uncomfortable. Even
as a person who prides myself on "telling it like it is" I fear further
attacks, ostracization and more pain than finding a receptive person.
That is often more of a reason women don't contribute to male dominated
online spaces as much. And being told that things get blown out of
proportion is absurd. Do you know how much stuff doesn't get talked about
that happens on Wikipedia or relation to it?
Weekly I deal with something. And I am being serious. So many things just
don't get talked about.
But I'm typing on my phone and not capable time wise to get into theory,
research and concepts onto why this is all so messed up.
Sarah
Sarah (Stierch)
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 19, 2013, at 1:35 AM, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas(a)googlemail.com>
wrote:
Hi Sarah,
I hope you're not implying I was rejecting it out of hand :) I'm being
fairly thoughtful about this, but I think Katherine didn't handle her
concerns well, and I wanted to communicate that as pleasantly as I could.
I disagree with the approach you seem to be suggesting, which is to take
any allegation of sexism (or etc.) and assume it to be both reasonable and
accurate. Instead what I suggest is that it is perfectly fine (and actually
a good thing) ot turn around and say "actually I don't think that was X",
whilst still being sensitive of what that individual feels.
And, no, I don't think it was sexist. I thought it was a sweet and
pleasant comment. Had the reference only been to body then I would almost
certainly have been in agreement with others here.
The name of this list doesn't talk about sexism, per se, but does
specifically talk about increasing participation of women within Wikimedia
projects. One of the key problems that puts people off editing, women
included, is how pleasant if kooky messages turn into unpleasant
interactions (To be honest, AQFK started that problem with his first, quite
hostile response).
I'm going to be controversial and say that 99.999% of the world, women
included, would have read that comment and not considered it inappropriate,
sexist of offputting. At least in my experience. That's not to say those
that do have a problem with it should remain quiet, but I suggest the way
to approach the topic is:
a) address drmies directly first
b) avoid a lecturing tone (and I appreciate Katherine's initial note was
not unpleasant, but I can see how it could be - and was - interpreted as
patronising and lecturing. In the same way I see how Katherine sees the
Drmies note as sexist)
Because the comment that was made in response to this, I believe, caused
something which is more off-putting to new editors. The core problem we
have as a community is that someone *always* seems to react negatively to
*everything*. And I believe that is the key problem that puts women, and
others, off Wikipedia as opposed to comments that could (or could not) be
viewed as sexist.
I support and encourage people to voice their concerns. But what I suggest
is that there is a way to voice concerns constructively, in ways that don't
compound the problem! By approaching Drmies directly Katherine might have
been able to explain her viewpoint to him and convince him of the issue
that she saw. And he may then have edited the comment, or apologised. And
he may then have begun to reconsider future comments in that context.
So that is why I think it's worth highlighting the matter from a different
perspective :)
Tom
On 18 July 2013 21:44, Sarah <slimvirgin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Thomas Morton
<
morton.thomas(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
He almost certainly would have :)
There is nothing inappropriate about the phrase mind and body.
What is inappropriate is nerd rage. That's what puts of people (of all
sorts) from contributing.
But I know I am in a minority singing from the sensible hymn sheet
around here so I'll put up ;) hopefully having made a point that might
cause at least one person to think carefully.
Tom
Hi Tom,
When a woman sincerely alleges that something is sexist, or a black
person that something is racist, or a gay person that something is
homophobic, there's no point in a male/white/straight person rejecting it
out of hand. The only way discrimination will ever end is if we admit we
have blind spots, then try to work out whether one of them just kicked in.
That Fluff was attacked onwiki was predictable, and that's why most
people wouldn't have said anything, but it would be great if members of
this list would try to get the point she was making.
Sarah
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap