Hello,
I am crossposting to the Wikimedia LGBT list. The issue is whether a photo
of a nearly nude female fashion model should be featured as a Wikimedia
Commons picture of the Day. There is consensus that Commons should host
such pictures; the debate is whether such pictures should be featured in
public channels where people who are not requesting this sort of content
would see them.
<
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Picture_of_the_da…
@Risker - I disagree with your critique that the picture is insignificant
in the fashion industry. The person featured in the picture identifies as a
fashion model and the picture was donated by her designee as a portrayal of
her in accord with her personality rights in the photo. It seems like the
picture was donated to Wikimedia Commons in the context of her fashion
career. These things and the cultural context of the fashion industry led
me to form the opinion that this is a fashion photo meeting the
professional standards of a leading model who has worked deeply in the
relevant industries over a long and respectable career. By the career
described in the Wikipedia article, the person featured in the photo seems
among the elite of contemporary fashion models and thus I interpret the
creation of the work to be the product of choices made by a person with
more agency to make decisions than most other people on this earth. Such as
it is, it exemplifies an utterly familiar style in contemporary societies
worldwide, and for this reason, I assert it has a place deserving respect
in Wikimedia projects.
@Val, as you say, posting sexually objectifying pictures of people of any
gender or sexuality harms women, and putting this image in a public place
would harm women. In supporting discussions about broadly advertising such
images on Wikimedia Commons image I acknowledge that I am intentionally
harming women, and I regret that I advocate for the positions which lead to
my harm of women. I wish that the harm was not a result of my position, but
I keep my position because of benefits associated with it and not harms. I
trust you have already had conversations with people in the gay rights
movement and have heard that the movement has practiced decades of
advocating for healthy gay male gender expression and sexuality, which is
different from other kinds of gender expression and sexuality and includes
practices which unintentionally challenge the expectations of people who
are not gay males. Any community which restricts the expression of
sexuality and gender diversity is an unsafe community for persons of all
minority genders and sexualities, and for that reason, it is in the
interest of sexual and gender minorities to oppose restrictions against
such expression. If you wish to talk more about this then I am at hand, but
I wanted to acknowledge the harm that I do to you and say that I regret it
and seek a reconciliation of ideas or routes to continue the harmful
actions while also lessening the harm and making amends.
@ Nathan, yes, Val is presenting a common and compelling perspective.
Ryan's notion of a sexualized environment is a great way to think about
this - gay males are more likely to find acceptance in such places and any
female's risk of harm is increased in such places, so there is tension
between the groups because they each shape the environment in a way that
makes the other unsafe.
@Moriel - I do not feel strongly about this particular image of a swimsuit
girl. I just do not want to propagate a culture of sexual shame, because
that kind of culture causes a lot of health problems in the gay male
community. There is completely a double standard about the effects of
objectifying women versus sexually objectifying males; males simply are not
as harmed as women are from this. I regret having to disagree with you in
saying that it is always time to talk about sexual health issues because a
range of problems including HIV still exist.
I remain grateful for our Adrianne, recently deceased, and her promotion of
gay male bondage erotica by coordinating Wikipedia outreach to the Tom of
Finland Foundation in Los Angeles. I do not mean to speak for her in
mentioning this, so it is enough for me to say that it is uncommon to find
women who are sympathetic to the cultural value of transgressive gay
pornography. I myself would not have been comfortable encouraging such a
countercultural group to be among the first gay activist organizations to
partner with the Wikipedia community, but acceptance for all kinds of
people seemed to be one of Adrianne's values and I am grateful that she
supported their greater prominence when other people did not.
Thanks for your other comments. I am glad that the gender gap board is a
positive place for respectful discussion of sexuality, and that all the
forms of expression at LGBT events are treated with respect on Wikipedia
even if they are minority views.
Please be aware that in the month of June as part of Wiki Loves Pride some
sexualized media may be proposed to be featured in various channel feeds on
Wikimedia projects. Please follow
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Loves_Pride_2014
to become aware of content discussions should
they occur. I have no
particular plans or expectations for Wiki Loves Pride but I would like
Wikipedia to become a safer place for gay males and LGBT persons generally.
As always, Wikipedians can contact me for voice or video chat which is so
much better than text talk.
yours,
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, first off, this isn't a fashion image and isn't utilized as one;
> it's an image of a mostly nude woman. (Go ahead, try to persuade me that
> it would qualify as a featured image of a monokini. Yeah, see, not a
> fashion image.) A number of the FP supports explicitly support because of
> the (for lack of a better term) "arousability index" of the photo. I
don't
> think it's even a particularly good glamour photo; it's just the best we
> happen to have, and I'm not sure it would pass FP in 2014. It's nowhere
> near as good as most of the images in [[Erotic photography]] - and there is
> currently a discussion to merge [[Glamour photography]] into [[Erotic
> photography]].
> (The paragraph below may be off-topic)
> Secondly, I'm not convinced that
seeking, curating, and featuring images
> that objectify subjects in a sexual manner is a particularly useful or
> encyclopedic goal, absent some genuine artistic merit. Most LGBTQ people I
> know don't parade around in the nearly-nude even at Pride Week events. Many
> of the people I know who embrace a more fluid sexuality find that
> media attention on Pride Week (and LGBTQ issues in general) tends to focus
> very disproportionately on the prurient and exhibitionist, and the
> excessive focus on highly sexualized imagery promotes the fallacy that
> those who are "non-straight" are obsessed with sex to a much greater
degree
> than the "average straight". I sense that most participants on this list
> would consider sexual orientation/gender identification only one important
> trait of an individual, so perhaps in that sense *we're* atypical. :-) But
> I have to say that my favourite unquestionably "gay" image on the project
> is of two men getting married, and it would be a huge coup to have an
> image like Michael Sam kissing his partner Vito on NFL draft day to
> illustrate [[Homosexuality in American football]] - and probably half a
> dozen other articles.
> Risker/Anne
> On 14 May 2014 09:56, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>
>> I wrote to a company which does male
fashion and I might write to more,
>> asking them to donate media.
>
>> Fashion is controversial but as an
industry it has driven world history.
>> Part of fashion is sexuality and Wikipedia is harmed by suppressing
>> sexuality and the world is harmed when Wikipedia does this. Fashion is both
>> what is marketed and how people present themselves in any context.
>
>> Two Wikipedians, Dorothy Howard
(user:OR drohowa) and Jason Moore
>> (user:Another Believer) are coordinating a Wiki Loves Pride event to
>> commemorate June as LGBT Pride month. Especially if we could present other
>> photos equally objectifying and celebrating a range of genders and body
>> types then this kind of picture presentation could become a more positive
>> experience among a general call for appreciation of sensual beauty in all
>> its forms, rather than just pop-media marketing ideas.
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Loves_Pride_2014
>
>> The Wikimedia Commons challenge will also be LGBT-themed for June
>> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Photo_challenge
>> so perhaps people can upload sexiness
and fun from various gay pride
>> events around the world in June. Flickr in particular has and will continue
>> to have lots of LGBT pride pictures from around the world. See also
>> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:LGBT_events_by_year
>
>> I would love to see this controversy turn into a discussion about
>> acceptance of all kinds of people and praise for healthy expression of
>> sexuality.
>
>> yours,
>
>
>
>
>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 8:57 AM,
LtPowers <LtPowers_Wiki(a)rochester.rr.com
>> > wrote:
>
>>> > So where is the dude
cheesecake? :)
>>
>>
>>
>>> We don't appear to have any that has reached Featured Picture
status yet.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I'm kind of torn on this one. I don't think we should be making
value
>>> judgments on whether or not a particular FP is "worthy" of being
featured
>>> on the Main Page or not; if it's good enough to be FP, it should be good
>>> enough to be POTD. But the opponents are right that this would turn off a
>>> lot of editors and potentially cause a firestorm. That makes this seem
>>> like a case of maintaining our ideals versus being practical about the
>>> impact, but maybe that's oversimplifying?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Powers
&8^]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>> Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>>
>
>
>> --
>> Lane Rasberry
>> user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
>> 206.801.0814
>> lane(a)bluerasberry.com
>
>>
_______________________________________________
>> 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
--
Lane Rasberry
user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
206.801.0814
lane(a)bluerasberry.com
