But I did all those things, Powers. I said that I knew it was supposed to be humourous and that LoS might not personally mind it, and I said that my concern was for other people reading it. And the responses I've gotten, both directed at me and among people not talking to me, were pretty horrible. All of them alleged that I had no right to speak at all, and certainly not a right to ruin the fun other editors were having with my silly old "women are equal" crap. I see a large part - maybe the bigger part - of the problem here as the fact that men perceive my intervention as "humorless scolding" that's just out to ruin their good, clean fun (fun that was totally humorous and in no way in need of correction, of course), and that they feel the appropriate response to that is to jeer, laugh, and insult me freely, the better to make sure no woman dares speak up next time. As a thought experiment, Powers, consider: would you ever tell a male editor that their behavior came off as "scolding"? I suspect the answer is no; that's a term almost exclusively reserved for use against women. -Fluff On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Powers &lt;LtPowers_Wiki(a)rochester.rr.com > wrote: > I think your approach was well-intentioned but flawed, much like > Drmies’ initial post. > > > > Unfortunately, your admonition came off like the stereotypical “that’s > so sexist to comment on a woman’s body” approach, which triggered defenses > that focused on the fact that it was just a joke, Drmies and LoS are > friends, why don’t you people have a sense of humor? > > > > If, instead, you’d acknowledged the humor (rather than just an attempt > at humor), acknowledged that LoS herself likely would not find it > offensive, nor that Drmies intended it as such… and then explained that > your concern was for other editors who might come across the comment and, > not knowing the relationships involved, tick Wikipedia down yet another > mental notch in “welcomingness”. > > > > Instead you came across as humorless and scolding, which rarely > garners productive responses. > > > > > > Powers &8^] > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* Katherine Casey [mailto:fluffernutter.wiki@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday 17 July 2013 14:24 > *To:* Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects > *Subject:* [Gendergap] Casual sexism on en.wp > > > > Another day, another example<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministra… casual sexism exhibited by en.wikipedia editors who mean absolutely no > harm, but simply don't understand how they could cause harm while meaning > none. I seem to have<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboar… significant alarm and offense to a number of male editors be > publicly pointing out that I found the comment inappropriate. > > > > Was there a better way to handle this? I can't help feeling that > saying nothing or hatting the section would have been supporting the notion > that it's either not a problem or not remarkable for male editors to make > comments encouraging others to comment on female editors' bodies. > > > > -Fluff > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > > _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap