On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:

Andreas - you seem to have the belief that the pervasive exposure to pornography is having an adverse effect on community dynamics, and in particular is having a negative impact on the recruitment of women editors. Perhaps you might want to consider whether your pervasive discussions of pornography aren't having a similar effect.

This is a great way to kill a thread, when twice in the last few hours, members of this forum have striven to redirect threads from the topic of pornography.

Risker/Anne

Anne,

It is not about pervasive exposure to pornography at all. We have established – and all of us are in agreement on this point – that women generally are very rarely exposed to it in Wikipedia, unless they seek it out.

The problem is that the male culture that likes its pornography out there, and rails against any limitation of it, even a token one like an opt-in filter, concomitantly ALSO happens to be sexist and unwelcoming to women, which is again something at least the women here are largely agreed on.

Let's just leave it at that. Wikimedia has far and away the most pro-porn, anti-censorship/anti-filtering policy of any top-10 website. It also has the lowest female participation of all these 10 websites.

I believe that it is appalling, and I believe that these two facts are closely related: you are welcome to disagree.

Andreas