On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:25 PM, Emily Monroe <emilymonroe03@gmail.com> wrote:

I find I'm not really girly girly all that much. Pink and purple used to be my absolute favorite colors, for example, but now "Pretty much shade of blue" fills a slot above them. Of course, at least in America, blue=baby boy, know what I mean?

What I'm trying to say is, sometimes somebody who's comfortable with being a woman isn't always going to fulfill the "fluff, rainbow, unicorns, and sparkles!" stereotypical of how a woman should act. I don't want a backlash in response to this sort of concern severe enough that I feel uncomfortable editing.


I think a number of people here can relate to this sentiment. When I was a child, one of my bedrooms was white with pink roses. I hated it so much, I slept in a closet..literally, by choice. As a teenager I was raised by my father and teal and black were the shades of choice. To this very day I wear black most days and I prefer "fuchsia" over pink.  But, I must admit, I love the smell of roses.

I don't believe any of us want an uber-femme Wikipedia to be a tool to encourage contributors. I do really like the idea of expanding on skin options, and I do think the option of having a "user friendly" look can help improve contributions (just like the visual editor..which I have missed a demo of..twice).

In a fantasy world it'd be really neat to demo different skins and user experiences with women of all ages - usability studies (like we do at the Archives of American Art with researchers of all ages and experience levels). I suppose that will be the only way we'll know if aesthetics, functionality and usability matter when it comes to women contributing to Wikipedia.

-Sarah
(and yeah I like unicorns..)

--
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sarahstierch.com/