I am actually in agreement with you on both points. The linkage I postulated was a far more indirect one – I postulated an effect on male demographics, and how it may affect the behaviour of male contributors on Wikimedia sites.
Thanks for your links. If I may, I'd like to offer some thoughts on the first two links you provided.
The first of these was
It mentioned, among other things, that –
the specific jargon, aggressive behaviours, strict rules and meritocracy are factors pushing away certain users ... there is harassment & aggressivity towards women ... lack of mentorship ... special jargon, unwritten rules ...
The other link was the pinboard image:
It includes such points as these five:
– baja autoestima (low self-esteem),
– La opinión de los hombres vale mas que la de las mujeres (men's opinions count more than women's opinions),
– harassment on the mailing list and on the wiki,
– La comunidad hace que te sientes incompetente (the community makes you feel incompetent)
– Es un contexto agresivo? (is it an aggressive environment?)
Of course, there are many other points mentioned on the pinboard as well, such as women having less time for volunteer work (beyond our means to fix), or lack of mentorship/lack of community building compared to content building (something the Tea House is designed to address, for example). So clearly there are other important factors, and what I am talking about is just one element in the overall equation.
But I believe the items I highlighted above relate to what I was driving at.
The fact is that certain male behaviours are only found in environments like locker rooms or building sites where men feel that they are "among themselves" and need not consider women's opinions.
Locker-room type imagery (as reflected in en:WP articles like "tit torture" or "hogtie bondage" for example, which are transparently and needlessly designed to serve the male gaze) psychologically signals to men that they are in a male environment and are free to behave in that way. I believe this explains something of the vehemence with which some male editors defend articles illustrated like this: for some of them it is not so much about censorship, it is really about defending the vision that Wikipedia is owned by men.
A woman passing by a men-only building site has a greater chance of being teased, cat-called, harassed, disparaged, put down, or belittled than a woman passing a mixed-gender group standing by the road. A single woman entering a male locker room is less likely to be treated respectfully than a woman serving a male customer at a bank, or a woman being served by a male shop employee.
This sense of being belittled, discounted, harassed and aggressed is what is reflected in the pinboard statements above. Every woman entering Wikipedia is surrounded by nine men who feel the place belongs to them.
It is no coincidence that banks and shops do not have calendars with naked women (or men) on the walls, and that there are rules against displaying such imagery in many workplaces. These rules open workplaces up to women. Wikipedia's porn has a significance to the gender gap that goes far beyond its capacity to turn off individual women encountering it.
