On 2/10/2011 11:45 AM, Oliver Keyes wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 4:26 PM, <carolmooredc@verizon.net> wrote:

Hi. I'm Carolmooredc and since I edit on controversial political topics
I get in lots of trouble with guys who don't like opinionated females
who don't shut up and go away when they are told to. I wish it got me
down enough to leave and do something more profitable, but I'm stubborn
- and semi-retired with lots of time on my hands.

So if you were a man editing controversial topics, you wouldn't get in trouble?

First, I think we've seen a number of women here have complained about similar problems to mine (which I barely outlined). I waited til I'd seen enough before joining and posting myself.

I don't think it's appropriate to go into detail, but in general on several articles I have noticed there's a total double standard with comments by males that
are quite controversial being ignored while comments by me which other males only *interpret* as being controversial are attacked.

More importantly is that in last couple years I've become effective at running to the appropriate noticeboard (especially WP:RS and WP:NPOV) to get help which often has led to my position (which often is shared with one or more males) being supported by the community. However, while the males may suffer some minor abuse (sometimes only because they dare to agree with me!), I'm the only one they are always trying to run off the article, including with sections with my name on it!! (And I won't even go into the off wiki harassment.)

It would be laughable if it weren't obvious that its systematic male bias that has run lots of women off wikipedia before it gets anywhere as bad as it has against me. And it needs to be dealt with.

I don't intend to get into a lot of back and forth on this topic, which I think women posters largely understand.

I'm just interested in seeing actual action on issues in various wikipedias.

CM