I don't know whether this is worth bothering about, but it's the kind of thing that concerns me. Anyone not wanting to look at genitalia should not click on the links.
I came across [[Labiaplasty]], while looking for material on female genital mutilation. There's an image on the page of what is supposed to be before and after a labiaplasty.
The previous caption implied that it was the same woman, though it doesn't look like it -- for one thing, larger versions of the images on the Commons show one has a mole on her abdomen and the other doesn't.
What really bothers me is the "before" image shows a woman within a normal range, yet we are presenting this as something in need of surgery. I'm concerned that young women could stumble on this and start to doubt themselves.
The image and upload history are here -- http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hypertrophy_of_Labia_Minora_before_an...
There's no indication that these are "medical" images; no indication of model release; no reliable sources indicating that the "oversized" one really is regarded as such; and the images were uploaded by occasionally used accounts.
I've twice removed the image from the article, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Labiaplasty&action=historysubm... and I've left a note on talk, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Labiaplasty#Image but it is being restored. If anyone wants to jump in, please do. If not, no worries. I'll completely understand if you would all prefer not to comment.
Sarah
I think you are perfectly right, Sarah.
The woman on the right is also more muscular. The fact that those images keep being restored shows a definite intention, which makes it not an occasional mistake but a voluntary and persistent medical lie.
You are also right about the need of surgery. From what I hear there is a growing demand of surgery from teenage girls, concerning any part of their bodies, buttocks, femur length, whatever. It seems to me WP should take the contrary stance and chose images of average looking women as methodically as possible. Same principle as for anorexia.
Arnaud
On 17/09/2011 18:37, Sarah wrote:
I don't know whether this is worth bothering about, but it's the kind of thing that concerns me. Anyone not wanting to look at genitalia should not click on the links.
I came across [[Labiaplasty]], while looking for material on female genital mutilation. There's an image on the page of what is supposed to be before and after a labiaplasty.
The previous caption implied that it was the same woman, though it doesn't look like it -- for one thing, larger versions of the images on the Commons show one has a mole on her abdomen and the other doesn't.
What really bothers me is the "before" image shows a woman within a normal range, yet we are presenting this as something in need of surgery. I'm concerned that young women could stumble on this and start to doubt themselves.
The image and upload history are here -- http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hypertrophy_of_Labia_Minora_before_an...
There's no indication that these are "medical" images; no indication of model release; no reliable sources indicating that the "oversized" one really is regarded as such; and the images were uploaded by occasionally used accounts.
I've twice removed the image from the article, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Labiaplasty&action=historysubm... and I've left a note on talk, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Labiaplasty#Image but it is being restored. If anyone wants to jump in, please do. If not, no worries. I'll completely understand if you would all prefer not to comment.
Sarah
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
A lot of this surgery is cosmetic surgery, thus it is a matter of taste, not a matter of dysfunction or normality. And, usually, is quite private and nobody's business. So, I don't see a problem so long as the cosmetic aspect is clear.
There is a plastic surgeon who specializes in this area that has uploaded many images for promotional purposes. I'm pretty sure he has quit by now. That was several years ago.
Fred
I don't know whether this is worth bothering about, but it's the kind of thing that concerns me. Anyone not wanting to look at genitalia should not click on the links.
I came across [[Labiaplasty]], while looking for material on female genital mutilation. There's an image on the page of what is supposed to be before and after a labiaplasty.
The previous caption implied that it was the same woman, though it doesn't look like it -- for one thing, larger versions of the images on the Commons show one has a mole on her abdomen and the other doesn't.
What really bothers me is the "before" image shows a woman within a normal range, yet we are presenting this as something in need of surgery. I'm concerned that young women could stumble on this and start to doubt themselves.
The image and upload history are here -- http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hypertrophy_of_Labia_Minora_before_an...
There's no indication that these are "medical" images; no indication of model release; no reliable sources indicating that the "oversized" one really is regarded as such; and the images were uploaded by occasionally used accounts.
I've twice removed the image from the article, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Labiaplasty&action=historysubm... and I've left a note on talk, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Labiaplasty#Image but it is being restored. If anyone wants to jump in, please do. If not, no worries. I'll completely understand if you would all prefer not to comment.
Sarah
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On 17/09/2011 20:14, Fred Bauder wrote:
A lot of this surgery is cosmetic surgery, thus it is a matter of taste, not a matter of dysfunction or normality. And, usually, is quite private and nobody's business.
From an average citizen's point of view, certainly. From a parent's, educator's or non cosmetic doctor point of view, I doubt so.
As I said previously, I am not a doctor, but I am regularly employed as a geek placing photos on the local medical faculty's website. I understand most people will be shocked by a sense of decency vs obscenity here, but for me I almost sigh with relief by seeing something perfectly healthy. And although I am not a doctor I am not sure this kind of labia should be shown as something in need of surgery.
Now about teenage girls with normal organs who demand surgery as their free personal choice, I know it creates quite a lot of trouble in families, with sometimes a huge loss of money for average income parents, or severe behaviour problems for the girl who doesn't get her surgery.
I also believe that the quest for a "perfectly" formatted body is part of the objectification of women.
And last, for the cognitive or educational aspect, it should be emphasized that non top model or non porn actress bodies are normal.
Arnaud
On 17/09/2011 20:14, Fred Bauder wrote:
A lot of this surgery is cosmetic surgery, thus it is a matter of taste, not a matter of dysfunction or normality. And, usually, is quite private and nobody's business.
From an average citizen's point of view, certainly. From a parent's, educator's or non cosmetic doctor point of view, I doubt so.
As I said previously, I am not a doctor, but I am regularly employed as a geek placing photos on the local medical faculty's website. I understand most people will be shocked by a sense of decency vs obscenity here, but for me I almost sigh with relief by seeing something perfectly healthy. And although I am not a doctor I am not sure this kind of labia should be shown as something in need of surgery.
Now about teenage girls with normal organs who demand surgery as their free personal choice, I know it creates quite a lot of trouble in families, with sometimes a huge loss of money for average income parents, or severe behaviour problems for the girl who doesn't get her surgery.
I also believe that the quest for a "perfectly" formatted body is part of the objectification of women.
And last, for the cognitive or educational aspect, it should be emphasized that non top model or non porn actress bodies are normal.
Arnaud
As is the plastic surgery craze.
Fred
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 13:00, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
On 17/09/2011 20:14, Fred Bauder wrote:
A lot of this surgery is cosmetic surgery, thus it is a matter of taste, not a matter of dysfunction or normality. And, usually, is quite private and nobody's business.
From an average citizen's point of view, certainly. From a parent's, educator's or non cosmetic doctor point of view, I doubt so.
As I said previously, I am not a doctor, but I am regularly employed as a geek placing photos on the local medical faculty's website. I understand most people will be shocked by a sense of decency vs obscenity here, but for me I almost sigh with relief by seeing something perfectly healthy. And although I am not a doctor I am not sure this kind of labia should be shown as something in need of surgery.
Now about teenage girls with normal organs who demand surgery as their free personal choice, I know it creates quite a lot of trouble in families, with sometimes a huge loss of money for average income parents, or severe behaviour problems for the girl who doesn't get her surgery.
I also believe that the quest for a "perfectly" formatted body is part of the objectification of women.
And last, for the cognitive or educational aspect, it should be emphasized that non top model or non porn actress bodies are normal.
Arnaud
I would say the bottom line for Wikipedia is that we need responsible medical sources saying that an image depicts something outside a "normal" range. By responsible, I mean sources not seeking business, but regular physicians writing peer-reviewed articles -- secondary sources, i.e. review articles -- about this kind of procedure.
At least that way we would know we weren't misleading women and young girls into thinking they lie outside the range when in fact they're perfectly normal.
Sarah
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote: ...
What really bothers me is the "before" image shows a woman within a normal range, yet we are presenting this as something in need of surgery. I'm concerned that young women could stumble on this and start to doubt themselves.
Somewhat related: The most well-known Danish woman's self-awareness book, [[da:Kvinde, kend din krop]] was originally published in 1975, and has been revised several times since. This year, the group behind the book opened a photo booth in order to collect images of the diversity of female genitalia. Have a look at it at http://kvindekenddinkrop.dk/ - use your favourite translation service if you don't read Danish (no, there are no genitalia on the front page - the link 'BILLEDERNE' will take you there).
Regards, Ole
1. If it's so clear that the "before and after" picture is of not one but two women, what is the intention behind it being restored? I know the answers could very well be guessestimates at best at this point, but how can we figure this out? 2. If the picture is showing results of a non-medical procedure, it should be stated as such. I remember accessing Wikipedia several times throughout my teenaged years; we cannot expect all of our readers to be an adult with a better understanding of anatomy.
From, Emily
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Ole Palnatoke Andersen <palnatoke@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote: ...
What really bothers me is the "before" image shows a woman within a normal range, yet we are presenting this as something in need of surgery. I'm concerned that young women could stumble on this and start to doubt themselves.
Somewhat related: The most well-known Danish woman's self-awareness book, [[da:Kvinde, kend din krop]] was originally published in 1975, and has been revised several times since. This year, the group behind the book opened a photo booth in order to collect images of the diversity of female genitalia. Have a look at it at http://kvindekenddinkrop.dk/ - use your favourite translation service if you don't read Danish (no, there are no genitalia on the front page
- the link 'BILLEDERNE' will take you there).
Regards, Ole
-- http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On 17/09/2011 22:40, Emily Monroe wrote:
I remember accessing Wikipedia several times throughout my teenaged years; we cannot expect all of our readers to be an adult with a better understanding of anatomy.
Just a quick note here : I've been talking to a dermatologist and she tells me one of the main issues is black women taking all sorts of meds to lighten their skin.
It is often detrimental to health, and also it leads to considerable money loss in impoverished families, and unnecessary sorrow.
I just thought Wikipedia should be aware of that. Here (fr) dermatologist are recruiting black women in the medical sector to lead campaigns against that.
I guess one of the ways would be to show dark black women pictures more often, not just light brown.
Arnaud
Very interesting point.
Sydney
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Arnaud HERVE arnaudherve@x-mail.netwrote:
On 17/09/2011 22:40, Emily Monroe wrote:
I remember accessing Wikipedia several times throughout my teenaged years; we cannot expect all of our readers to be an adult with a better understanding of anatomy.
Just a quick note here : I've been talking to a dermatologist and she tells me one of the main issues is black women taking all sorts of meds to lighten their skin.
It is often detrimental to health, and also it leads to considerable money loss in impoverished families, and unnecessary sorrow.
I just thought Wikipedia should be aware of that. Here (fr) dermatologist are recruiting black women in the medical sector to lead campaigns against that.
I guess one of the ways would be to show dark black women pictures more often, not just light brown.
Arnaud
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
My impression is that we have an appalling dearth of photographs of black people generally, just like our coverage of black topics in general is wanting, including such basic areas as hair care and skin care. Articles on black intellectuals are often either poor stubs, or get deleted for erroneous assertions of lack of notability. In my opinion, we need a major outreach to African studies scholars, and black media, because we are missing out on the knowledge people of colour could bring to the project. Andreas
--- On Mon, 19/9/11, Sydney Poore sydney.poore@gmail.com wrote:
From: Sydney Poore sydney.poore@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Black skins To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Monday, 19 September, 2011, 13:28
Very interesting point.
Sydney
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Arnaud HERVE arnaudherve@x-mail.net wrote:
On 17/09/2011 22:40, Emily Monroe wrote:
I remember accessing Wikipedia several times throughout my teenaged
years; we cannot expect all of our readers to be an adult with a
better understanding of anatomy.
Just a quick note here : I've been talking to a dermatologist and she
tells me one of the main issues is black women taking all sorts of meds
to lighten their skin.
It is often detrimental to health, and also it leads to considerable
money loss in impoverished families, and unnecessary sorrow.
I just thought Wikipedia should be aware of that. Here (fr)
dermatologist are recruiting black women in the medical sector to lead
campaigns against that.
I guess one of the ways would be to show dark black women pictures more
often, not just light brown.
Arnaud
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Here is an example of Caucasian bias: the en:WP article on [[hair straightening]]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_straightening Despite the fact that this is a topic of great practical interest to black women, many of whom either have straightened their hair or have thought about doing it, the article makes no mention of afro hair, and the only two images are of Caucasian women. This article seems to fail a demographic of millions; and by failing these millions, we are also curtailing our chances of recruiting editors from this demographic, because it is likely to leave them with the impression that Wikipedia is not written for them.
A.
--- On Mon, 19/9/11, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@yahoo.com wrote:
From: Andreas Kolbe jayen466@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Black skins To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Monday, 19 September, 2011, 13:59
My impression is that we have an appalling dearth of photographs of black people generally, just like our coverage of black topics in general is wanting, including such basic areas as hair care and skin care. Articles on black intellectuals are often either poor stubs, or get deleted for erroneous assertions of lack of notability. In my opinion, we need a major outreach to African studies scholars, and black media, because we are missing out on the knowledge people of colour could bring to the project. Andreas
--- On Mon, 19/9/11, Sydney Poore sydney.poore@gmail.com wrote:
From: Sydney Poore sydney.poore@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Black skins To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Monday, 19 September, 2011, 13:28
Very interesting point.
Sydney
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Arnaud HERVE arnaudherve@x-mail.net wrote:
On 17/09/2011 22:40, Emily Monroe wrote:
I remember accessing Wikipedia several times throughout my teenaged
years; we cannot expect all of our readers to be an adult with a
better understanding of anatomy.
Just a quick note here : I've been talking to a dermatologist and she
tells me one of the main issues is black women taking all sorts of meds
to lighten their skin.
It is often detrimental to health, and also it leads to considerable
money loss in impoverished families, and unnecessary sorrow.
I just thought Wikipedia should be aware of that. Here (fr)
dermatologist are recruiting black women in the medical sector to lead
campaigns against that.
I guess one of the ways would be to show dark black women pictures more
often, not just light brown.
Arnaud
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On 9/19/11 4:26 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Here is an example of Caucasian bias: the en:WP article on [[hair straightening]].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_straightening
Despite the fact that this is a topic of great practical interest to black women, many of whom either have straightened their hair or have thought about doing it, the article makes no mention of afro hair, and the only two images are of Caucasian women.
Topical to this, there is a documentary:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Hair
That points out that hair straightening (Relaxer) is a billion dollar industry. This is a clear bias; I'm actually flabbergasted by this.
Great point. Although there is a fairly robust page on Hair Relaxer. Not sure if the two processes are the same but they certainly could mention each other: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_relaxer
founder/ceo, 1X57 www.1X57.com t: @sengseng m: 202.423.6609
On Sep 19, 2011, at 6:28 PM, Brandon Harris bharris@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 9/19/11 4:26 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Here is an example of Caucasian bias: the en:WP article on [[hair straightening]].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_straightening
Despite the fact that this is a topic of great practical interest to black women, many of whom either have straightened their hair or have thought about doing it, the article makes no mention of afro hair, and the only two images are of Caucasian women.
Topical to this, there is a documentary:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Hair
That points out that hair straightening (Relaxer) is a billion dollar industry. This is a clear bias; I'm actually flabbergasted by this.
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
History continues to be written by Anglos and it's just as apparent in Wikipedia..and add a male dominated voice, and well...that's history.
The same goes for topics about Native American subjects. I say it in my lecture about Indigenous peoples working with Wikipedia - it's just like any other history, it's primarily written by white males, and that has to change (followed with a picture of Kevin Costner). (I'm sure the same goes for other communities/races/ethnicity/skin colors articles, whatever you prefer, as well, these are just two areas I tend to write in..)
Malcolm X described history being "bleached," and I couldn't agree more.
And here is one of my favorite Onion slaps: http://www.theonion.com/articles/white-history-year-resumes,139/
Having dialogue like this is a great start - I'd love to see it develop into a larger community discussion, like the gender gap publicity did. There is a lot of work to do, but, if we can develop successes with women, I like to think we can develop opportunities with more specific communities - and perhaps both at the same time.
-Sarah
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Brandon Harris bharris@wikimedia.orgwrote:
On 9/19/11 4:26 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Here is an example of Caucasian bias: the en:WP article on [[hair straightening]].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_straightening
Despite the fact that this is a topic of great practical interest to black women, many of whom either have straightened their hair or have
thought about doing it, the
article makes no mention of afro hair, and the only two images are of
Caucasian women.
Topical to this, there is a documentary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Hair That points out that hair straightening (Relaxer) is a billiondollar industry. This is a clear bias; I'm actually flabbergasted by this.
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On 17/09/2011 22:40, Emily Monroe wrote:
I remember accessing Wikipedia several times throughout my teenaged years; we cannot expect all of our readers to be an adult with a better understanding of anatomy.
Just a quick note here : I've been talking to a dermatologist and she tells me one of the main issues is black women taking all sorts of meds to lighten their skin.
It is often detrimental to health, and also it leads to considerable money loss in impoverished families, and unnecessary sorrow.
I just thought Wikipedia should be aware of that. Here (fr) dermatologist are recruiting black women in the medical sector to lead campaigns against that.
I guess one of the ways would be to show dark black women pictures more often, not just light brown.
Arnaud
There is a movie about black hair. Good Hair
Fred
I've mentioned my concern about the lack of "non-Anglo voices" also on Wikipedia and related project websites. I'm hoping that outreach projects within the gender gap "agenda" through WMF can help develop programming and outreach ideas that will be usable within diverse populations beyond just "men and women."
In regards to skintones, anyone who watches American commercials, and perhaps this depends on where they live, might notice that many companies use lighter skinned African American men and women who can be perceived as "mixed" or even Anglo in some circumstances, it appeals to a broader audience, in theory.
Just as it's important for Wikimedia to broaden relationships with women, it's important for us to broaden relationships outside of the "White world" (as seen in the last survey, Wikipedia is primarily Anglo). Again, voices * are* heard through neutrality and coverage of topics will expand. I also think it's important for Wikimedia to start to reach out to Latino populations as well - and this is in the United States specifically (and beyond, but, here, they are the fastest growing population).
We do need more photographs of all types of populations doing things that are deemed "Educational in nature", and we also need content related to those communities - whether artists or writers, doctors or fashion designers, quotes or sources, etc.
Then again I spent my undergrad writing about the representation of minorities in popular culture and you become obsessed with representation (let's just say..don't watch movies with me)...
-Sarah
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
On 17/09/2011 22:40, Emily Monroe wrote:
I remember accessing Wikipedia several times throughout my teenaged years; we cannot expect all of our readers to be an adult with a better understanding of anatomy.
Just a quick note here : I've been talking to a dermatologist and she tells me one of the main issues is black women taking all sorts of meds to lighten their skin.
It is often detrimental to health, and also it leads to considerable money loss in impoverished families, and unnecessary sorrow.
I just thought Wikipedia should be aware of that. Here (fr) dermatologist are recruiting black women in the medical sector to lead campaigns against that.
I guess one of the ways would be to show dark black women pictures more often, not just light brown.
Arnaud
There is a movie about black hair. Good Hair
Fred
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 06:06, Arnaud HERVE arnaudherve@x-mail.net wrote:
On 17/09/2011 22:40, Emily Monroe wrote:
I remember accessing Wikipedia several times throughout my teenaged years; we cannot expect all of our readers to be an adult with a better understanding of anatomy.
Just a quick note here : I've been talking to a dermatologist and she tells me one of the main issues is black women taking all sorts of meds to lighten their skin.
It is often detrimental to health, and also it leads to considerable money loss in impoverished families, and unnecessary sorrow.
I just thought Wikipedia should be aware of that. Here (fr) dermatologist are recruiting black women in the medical sector to lead campaigns against that.
I guess one of the ways would be to show dark black women pictures more often, not just light brown.
Arnaud
Good point, Arnaud. I've become very conscious recently of the way Wikipedia is being used to portray people in certain ways, which other people then assume is the norm. I've been focused on women's genitalia. We had an image on the [[Labia minora]] article that had the caption (and the title) "large" labia, whereas in fact they were well within the normal range. The same goes for photographs of black women, or any other. It goes back to Carol's point about how we need images that show diversity as normal.
Sarah
Arnaud,
I've just remembered a documentary related to your post that is very much worth watching. Here is a link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXG38QxXY-s
Andreas
--- On Mon, 19/9/11, Arnaud HERVE arnaudherve@x-mail.net wrote:
From: Arnaud HERVE arnaudherve@x-mail.net Subject: [Gendergap] Black skins To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Monday, 19 September, 2011, 13:06
On 17/09/2011 22:40, Emily Monroe wrote:
I remember accessing Wikipedia several times throughout my teenaged years; we cannot expect all of our readers to be an adult with a better understanding of anatomy.
Just a quick note here : I've been talking to a dermatologist and she tells me one of the main issues is black women taking all sorts of meds to lighten their skin.
It is often detrimental to health, and also it leads to considerable money loss in impoverished families, and unnecessary sorrow.
I just thought Wikipedia should be aware of that. Here (fr) dermatologist are recruiting black women in the medical sector to lead campaigns against that.
I guess one of the ways would be to show dark black women pictures more often, not just light brown.
Arnaud
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On 20/09/2011 01:10, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Not only worth watching but compulsory watching, I think. Thanks Andreas for this great link. I'll be watching the movie Good Hair next week-end.
Yes I suspect light brown caffelatte skin is becoming a sort of norm now. In fact by watching American TV series, I would not be surprised if the light brown woman is the one who's here to stay and join the team, and the dark brown woman is the one being killed during the episode, or not a recurring character.
On a more general scale, I first became aware of the dangers of unnecessary surgery by working for sports instructors a few years ago. If you imagine that sports physical enhancement will remain forever the mere injection of chemicals, well you're wrong. There is going to be carbon-fiber bones, all sorts of weird things.
Now as far as average women are concerned, there is a deadly combination of :
- the natural tendancy of women to take care of their appearance - new bio technologies - business interests eager to combine the two.
But that will create Frankenstein's monsters really. Uneducated women are going to get convinced that their shoulders are too large, their hips to narrow, their humerus too long... it will really become crazy and extend to whatever possible.
And then there is the problem of the consequences when growing older. In this case of skin whitening, even if the laboratory says it's safe, it nevertheless compulsorily means intervening in the skin as deep as the pigments, so frankly it doesn't sound that good to me.
So I would compare it to food disorders or pathological gambling. Even if adults do that of their own free will, responsible institutions should not go that way.
Arnaud
Arnaud,
I've ordered a copy of Good Hair as well. :) There are excellent scholarly sources on [[hair straightening]] in the black community. I dropped a few on the article's talk page, but it's just the tip of the iceberg. I may do some work on the article. Any help by editors better qualified than me welcome!
I agree about the Black Girls video. My wife showed it to me a few months ago, and it's stayed with me ever since.
As for your other point, about unnecessary surgery, Sarah spotted that we had some frankly misleading before/after plastic surgery pictures in a number of articles on female genitalia (uploaded by a plastic surgeon, no less). There were also two (2) in the vulva article. I found that quite perturbing.
Best, Andreas
--- On Wed, 21/9/11, Arnaud HERVE arnaudherve@x-mail.net wrote:
From: Arnaud HERVE arnaudherve@x-mail.net Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Black skins To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wednesday, 21 September, 2011, 0:15
On 20/09/2011 01:10, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Not only worth watching but compulsory watching, I think. Thanks Andreas for this great link. I'll be watching the movie Good Hair next week-end.
Yes I suspect light brown caffelatte skin is becoming a sort of norm now. In fact by watching American TV series, I would not be surprised if the light brown woman is the one who's here to stay and join the team, and the dark brown woman is the one being killed during the episode, or not a recurring character.
On a more general scale, I first became aware of the dangers of unnecessary surgery by working for sports instructors a few years ago. If you imagine that sports physical enhancement will remain forever the mere injection of chemicals, well you're wrong. There is going to be carbon-fiber bones, all sorts of weird things.
Now as far as average women are concerned, there is a deadly combination of :
- the natural tendancy of women to take care of their appearance - new bio technologies - business interests eager to combine the two.
But that will create Frankenstein's monsters really. Uneducated women are going to get convinced that their shoulders are too large, their hips to narrow, their humerus too long... it will really become crazy and extend to whatever possible.
And then there is the problem of the consequences when growing older. In this case of skin whitening, even if the laboratory says it's safe, it nevertheless compulsorily means intervening in the skin as deep as the pigments, so frankly it doesn't sound that good to me.
So I would compare it to food disorders or pathological gambling. Even if adults do that of their own free will, responsible institutions should not go that way.
Arnaud
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 18:30, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@yahoo.com wrote:
Arnaud,
I've ordered a copy of Good Hair as well. :) There are excellent scholarly sources on [[hair
straightening]] in the black community. I dropped a few on the article's talk page, but it's just
the tip of the iceberg. I may do some work on the article. Any help by editors better
qualified than me welcome!
I agree about the Black Girls video. My wife showed it to me a few months ago, and it's
stayed with me ever since.
As for your other point, about unnecessary surgery, Sarah spotted that we had some frankly
misleading before/after plastic surgery pictures in a number of articles on female genitalia
(uploaded by a plastic surgeon, no less). There were also two (2) in the vulva article. I found
that quite perturbing.
Best,
Andreas
Many thanks for your work on those articles, Andreas. I've written to a gynaecologist who published some images showing the natural variation between women, and I've asked if she's willing to release a couple.
The Black Girls video is very moving.
Sarah