From the Gendergap list, a really nice post, IMHO, from a newer female
user from Australia. Shared with permission.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia
Commons
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 13:52:44 +1000
From: <whiteghost.ink(a)gmail.com>
Reply-To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
<gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
<gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
This anime image is not appropriate on the front page. Questions of art,
of education, and of publication, all require judgement. Judgement in
these matters is normal and necessary and is not of itself something
which needs apology. Here are some reasons why I think it is okay to
decide NOT to put this picture on the front page. This is not to say
that it should be deleted, it is simply not appropriate for the front
page – and that does not constitute censorship.
The commonality of discriminatory product placement
Most areas of endeavor exercise care and some discrimination about their
products. It's not that they are illegal or censored; it's that they are
inappropriate in some places. For example, at a recent exhibition in the
Art Gallery of New South Wales, a very explicit drawing was placed at
the far end of the exhibition and a sign was placed discreetly to inform
members of the public who had to make a choice about whether to view
them. In the case of Wikimedia, there might be gory images, for example,
of the effect of land-mines which explode in children's faces. They are
probably valuable – encyclopedic and even educational – but would they
be appropriate on the front page? Their value is not diminished by
leaving them in the body of the repository and it is not censorship to
make some small efforts necessary to access them.
The woman's body
If you put a large-breasted indigenous naked woman in an image, people
would not be commenting on the size of her breasts. They would see them
as part of the woman herself, whereas the breasts on which people have
commented in this anime are plainly “designed” for service to (some)
viewers. In fact, this image's offensiveness to many comes not from the
size of the breasts but rather from the whole backbreaking pose of the
woman.
Art and education
If this is a form of art, the question is not whether or not you like
the breasts (there are lots of breasts in art) but whether the art has
its own integrity. That is an aesthetic question, which is why the
colour palette is not under challenge as it contributes to the integrity
of the image. Commons has criteria for aesthetic quality, but they do
not specify or restrict subject matter. However, whether you like this
art or any component part of it in any image is irrelevant. Audience
approval of the “tits” is only relevant if the image is about
titillation. Only if this is the purpose, does the approval of the pose
and body parts become relevant.
If the image is not about art but is rather about education, then the
subject's body and pose are misleading, as are the clothes and
everything else, even the colour palette. Above all, if it is about
education, then an argument that its primary purpose to educate about
the art form (manga) or the medium (the software) is spurious and
disingenuous.
Thanks,
Whiteghost.ink
PS I am a newbie female Åustralian Wikipedian and have been following
this list for a while but this is my first contribution to it. I really
think this is the wrong sort of image for the front page. Apart from all
the other arguments, I think it is likely to deter whole demographics
(plural) from contributing to any of the WM projects.
