Andreas - when you say "until the Foundation does something," what are you looking for them to do?
Sarah, change has to come from the top: from Sue and the board. As far as I am concerned, they have failed abysmally. There have been words and PR exercises, and no deeds.
One idea was raised just now: Enshrine the equivalent of the friendly space policy that applies to meet-ups in the terms of use, to apply to the online environment. Treat it like any workplace environment. Make clear that sexism, including inappropriate use of sexual imagery, will not be tolerated.
Here is another: redefine the scope of Commons, making it clear that the more sordid and pointless contributions are not welcome.
The Foundation should have cleaned up the festering sore that is Commons ("ethically broken", as Jimmy Wales called it recently) years ago. It has lacked the will to do so.
Without support from the top it is no surprise that people like you burn out, or simply stop challenging certain issues, because doing so makes you an outcast in the community that assembles under those conditions.
Here is what you said a few days ago:
---o0o---
I basically had to stop doing the painful nomination and arguing about nudity and women's images on Commons. Part of this was because it was so demoralizing and depressing, and the other was the repeated "You'll never be an admin on Commons if you keep doing this," and I always wanted to be an admin on Commons. The fact that I let this argument - being made by male Commonists - trigger me to not participate in the conversations is an entirely different psychological issue in itself! Oy vey.
---o0o---
Again, without support from the top, there is nothing you can do, or could have done as a fellow, to address this. But know this: the people who will leave in protest if the Foundation ever does step up to the plate are the ones who made your life hell there.
What Kaldari said earlier – "Don't mention the sexism!" – is a policy of appeasement and collusion. It reminds me of the parable of the boiling frog:
People in Wikipedia who are not sexists seem to have gotten so used to the institutionalised sexism that they have stopped noticing it, accepted it as "part of the deal" – something they can't change – and lost touch with the moral bearings they had before they entered the project.
Every non-Wikipedian I have described the situation at List of vegetarians to, or sent a link to the discussion, has reacted with complete incomprehension (or derision).
What are people like that doing in a Wikipedia article like this?
The Wikimedia Foundation should adjust its policies to be less welcoming to editors with such strange views of women, so they no longer "outnumber", to use Kaldari's expression, normal people.
The Foundation should have done so years ago. It has had many opportunities to do so, and has so far failed to take any of them.
You can always directly write the legal team and ask them for input on what "they" could do regarding your concerns. That's what I would do if I was you.
As you very well know, grantmaking and technical aren't able to do much of anything, due to our new focus. However, community members are welcome to develop Individual Engagement Grants and chapters are able to acquire funding for programs and projects, and the gender gap is something everyone loves to talk about over and over and over again but no one seems to be willing to step up as individuals or as chapters to make large scale changes outside of outreach activities. (And I am grateful for all people do on this list, but..I'm just sayin...it seems to be the same people over and over again bringing this up, however, all people seem to do to about it is complain and talk about it, and take no action, and it's really tiring and depressing to watch and puts the burden on those of us who have limited time and are already burnt out).
-Sarah
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap