Context is everything. If a male editor who was previously contemptuous of
women and the idea of addressing the gender gap writes a column supposedly
celebrating women scientists with the same tone, that tone would be widely
perceived as mockery and not celebration, and that perception would almost
certainly be accurate. I will publish people being provocative to make a
significant point about an important issue, but I won't provide a platform
for an asshole to be an asshole. I believe this is a fairly standard
editorial position.
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I think you miss my point, Slowking. It wouldn't
have been published at
all if not for the author. If a man had written it, I doubt it would have
made its way out of Gamaliel's inbox. And if a man with a reputation for
negative interactions with women had written it, and somehow or other those
aliens from Wikimedia-L had abducted Gamaliel and published the piece,
there would have been a 500,000 byte discussion on AN or ANI about whether
or not to indef the guy.
In other words, the only reason there's a controversy is that the Signpost
published a piece that it would have rejected if it had been written by
roughly 95% of the active editorship. I'm relatively certain if I'd
written exactly the same piece, they would have published it - but if you
did, Slowking, it would not have seen the light of day.
Risker/Anne
On 24 February 2016 at 13:59, J Hayes <slowking4(a)gmail.com> wrote:
"the reaction would have been infinitely
more severe if not for the name
of the author"
oh no, the reaction is because she is a women. commentators at signpost
care not of position, but they could be appalled that a woman is in a
position of responsibility. why waste a chance to sealion when someone is
celebrating the belated diversity article writing efforts.
it's all about the editing ethics on signpost, lol
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 24 February 2016 at 13:45, Nathan <nawrich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
Additionally, not only have I never heard "badass" used in a derogatory
way, I've never even once heard anyone suggest that it might be used as an
insult. In my experience it has only ever been a compliment. In the context
of Keilana's op-ed, it should be obvious to any reader that she used it
positively.
If exactly the same article had been written by someone who has a long
and
colourful history of behaviour considered to be very uncivil, nobody
would be thinking it was an okay article. It's only okay because Keilana
wrote it, it wouldn't be okay if someone with a history of alleged misogyny
wrote it *using exactly the same words*. I doubt very much that the
Signpost would have published it had it been written by any number of other
people - in fact, I'm doubtful it would have been published if written by
any male editor, though Rob could tell us otherwise - but even if they did
publish it, the reaction would have been infinitely more severe if not for
the name of the author.
Risker/Anne
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap