On 21 February 2016 at 18:42, Robert Fernandez <wikigamaliel(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Is it a double standard? If that page hadn't
been written by Keilana,
would it have been published as is?
I'm curious what you mean by this exactly. Do you mean you think I
published it because I know Emily personally and would not have published
it as a submission from an unknown author? Or are you saying I might not
have published a similar article by a male author?
(For what it's worth, I re-published an article by a male academic in the
Signpost last year that had the phrase "asshole consensus" in the title. )
If it had been written by editors who are known to regularly use
profanity, to the considerable consternation of some members of the
community, would you publish it? I mean...it just gave me plenty of
warning not to bother participating in the edit-a-thon I usually go to each
spring, since it is now apparently considered a net positive to report on
new articles about women in such a derogatory way. That's fine. It made it
clear that The Signpost would rather be sensationalistic than informative.
That's fine too, I can take it off my watchlist again.
No, it's pretty obvious that the profanity-laden article was published
because it was profanity-laden, not because it was any good.
Risker/Anne