On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Sarah
But I think it's important to mention it in the context of this thread. It
does seem to me that the sexism is getting worse, more blatant.
It is, and the reason is that it is humoured and swept under the carpet,
rather than confronted. Why is it humoured? Because people fear upsetting a
certain segment of male contributors, and the reputational cost to the
Wikimedia Foundation is still not significant enough.
I so admire Filipacchi. She did the right thing: rather than going to
Wikipedia and arguing with the likes of Qworty and JPL, where she would
simply have been abused with impunity, and accused of violating AGF, she
went to the press.
Sexism in Wikipedia may or may not be addressed when the general public is
fully aware of it, and thoroughly disgusted with it, but certainly not
It's a good question. Why is it humoured?