On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Russavia <russavia.wikipedia@gmail.com> wrote:
Frankly, I don't know why this is a "feminist" issue; rather than an
issue of common sense.

It is not a finite list, and for the vast majority of people on the
list, being a vegetarian is hardly responsible for even the smallest
piece of their notability; it is an arbitrary piece of trivia for most
of them. Take http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Lagarde for
example, her vegetarianism is but an afterthought in her biography,
yet she is being placed as the most prominent vegetarian in that
article. I would argue that this is taking the whole "feminist" issue
to its most illogical and extreme. ...



Hi Russavia, the question is why Wikipedia represented 13 women vegetarians visually by including six porn stars. They were there from at least June 2010 until recently, and even now there are still three. If a similarly racist situation existed, I think it would have been spotted and dealt with faster.

As of August 2012, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_vegetarians&oldid=505392733 the list of women consisted of:

Former porn star in a bikini; Playboy Playmate with breasts half exposed; tennis player; figure skater; actress; singer; presenter and model; actress; politician; singer; actress; primatologist; singer; model in a bikini; Playboy Playmate; dancer; Playboy Playmate; actress; porn actress.

But the list of men was very different:

Doctor and politician; scientist; revolutionary; philosopher; politician; playwright; chief rabbi; artist; chief rabbi; psychiatrist; journalist; writer; doctor; novelist; architect; Archbishop of Constantinople; poet; singer-songwriter; comedian; doctor; football player; actor; musician; fictional character.

That we allow women and men to be represented so differently suggests that Wikipedia has a problem recognizing and dealing with sexism. So the question is why, and how can we change it?