---------- From: Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:49:32 -0400 To: Laura Hale laura@fanhistory.com Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Proposal: Forking gendergap: Main list for women and transgender, sublist for male supporters
Laura, your interpretation of my words is strikingly self-serving, and your solutions would serve to widen whatever gap exists in the Project. This entire "problem" is not one of gender, but of individual persons having problems communicating with a particular group of other persons. My question to all of those who state that they have a problem communicating with, or feel intimidated by, a male in the venue of a mailing list such as this, is do you have the same problem in person? There are many, many strong, intelligent voices in the Wikipedia Project who also happen to be female. And to include them in this "gendergap", and suggest that this is strictly a gender issue, is an insult to them.
Marc
on 3/16/11 4:06 PM, Laura Hale at laura@fanhistory.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net wrote: This is simply, nonsense!
That is your opinion, and you're welcome to it. In my experience, there are two general groups of women:
1. One who welcome men as participants in events specifically targeting women, because the women feel the men can learn. 2. One who don't want men involved because they feel women should work towards their own self interests and that women behave differently around men. Don't you people realize that separating this List into two distinct ones would underline, reinforce and actually signify the very "gendergap" you are allegedly trying to resolve.
This pretty much is why I think we need men off the list. While you're intending to or not, I'm reading this as "Don't you understand that the only way women can succeed it by having men involved! You need men!" If you're not intending to send the message: Women cannot succeed with out men!, then you may want to reconsider your wording.
And I'd argue the opposite: Men have done an awful job at recruiting women to be involved with Wikipedia. The current problems exist because men have tried to "solve" this problem. This is people talking with people. If there is a female or male here who has a problem communicating with, or in the presence of, another gender - they do have a problem.
Translation: "Women! You're the problem! If you could stop engaging in female modes of communication, we could fix this problem! "
This list is NOT a general list for increasing the participation rates of people. If you want to have a list dedicated to generally increasing the participation rates of people on Wikipedia, then fork off and do that.
But a website Mailing List such as this is not the place to resolve it.
Am I supposed to interpret this as you claiming that this list has a mission that will never succeed because it acknowledges there are gender differences and different approaches are needed to get different audiences? As a woman, a representative of a minority group on Wikipedia, how am I supposed to respond to you? I can tell you that this post of yours makes me feel distinctly uncomfortable posting to this list. It seems to put men in the position of power above women, demanding that women participate only in male modes of communication, that women on the list can't talk about genuine concerns they have as women because they are going to get blown off, and that feelings of men on the list are more important then women.
It is remarkable that, when faced with a gap of this nature, that one could come to the conclusion that it is not a gender issue, as if it were merely that millions (billions?) of members of one social class had individual difficulties dealing with members of another social class and that for some strange and unknowable reason these difficulties did not flow in the other direction. Is the solution mass therapy?
Do I have the same problem in person? Yes, I, like many women, have been socialized since toddlerhood to defer to men, to play subservient roles and to withhold my opinions if they are controversial. I, like many women, have had terrible things happen to me merely because I am a woman. I bring this all with me when I sit down to edit. That there are exceptional women who, either from not having had these experiences or have been able to over come them, are able to successfully negotiate a world made for men does not mean that the many women like me are not real or important.
There is a problem, not a "problem".
Nepenthe
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.netwrote:
*From: *Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net *Date: *Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:49:32 -0400 *To: *Laura Hale laura@fanhistory.com
*Subject: *Re: [Gendergap] Proposal: Forking gendergap: Main list for women and transgender, sublist for male supporters
Laura, your interpretation of my words is strikingly self-serving, and your solutions would serve to widen whatever gap exists in the Project. This entire "problem" is not one of gender, but of individual persons having problems communicating with a particular group of other persons. My question to all of those who state that they have a problem communicating with, or feel intimidated by, a male in the venue of a mailing list such as this, is do you have the same problem in person? There are many, many strong, intelligent voices in the Wikipedia Project who also happen to be female. And to include them in this "gendergap", and suggest that this is strictly a gender issue, is an insult to them.
Marc
on 3/16/11 4:06 PM, Laura Hale at laura@fanhistory.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net wrote:
This is simply, nonsense!
That is your opinion, and you're welcome to it. In my experience, there are two general groups of women:
- One who welcome men as participants in events specifically targeting
women, because the women feel the men can learn. 2. One who don't want men involved because they feel women should work towards their own self interests and that women behave differently around men.
Don't you people realize that separating this List into two distinct ones would underline, reinforce and actually signify the very "gendergap" you are allegedly trying to resolve.
This pretty much is why I think we need men off the list. While you're intending to or not, I'm reading this as "Don't you understand that the only way women can succeed it by having men involved! You need men!" If you're not intending to send the message: Women cannot succeed with out men!, then you may want to reconsider your wording.
And I'd argue the opposite: Men have done an awful job at recruiting women to be involved with Wikipedia. The current problems exist because men have tried to "solve" this problem.
This is people talking with people. If there is a female or male here who has a problem communicating with, or in the presence of, another gender - they do have a problem.
Translation: "Women! You're the problem! If you could stop engaging in female modes of communication, we could fix this problem! "
This list is NOT a general list for increasing the participation rates of people. If you want to have a list dedicated to generally increasing the participation rates of people on Wikipedia, then fork off and do that.
But a website Mailing List such as this is not the place to resolve it.
Am I supposed to interpret this as you claiming that this list has a mission that will never succeed because it acknowledges there are gender differences and different approaches are needed to get different audiences? As a woman, a representative of a minority group on Wikipedia, how am I supposed to respond to you? I can tell you that this post of yours makes me feel distinctly uncomfortable posting to this list. It seems to put men in the position of power above women, demanding that women participate only in male modes of communication, that women on the list can't talk about genuine concerns they have as women because they are going to get blown off, and that feelings of men on the list are more important then women.
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
It is remarkable that, when faced with a gap of this nature, that one could come to the conclusion that it is not a gender issue, as if it were merely that millions (billions?) of members of one social class had individual difficulties dealing with members of another social class and that for some strange and unknowable reason these difficulties did not flow in the other direction. Is the solution mass therapy?
In a sense, yes. For example, in the UK there is thinking that the English countryside is, in some sense, white. What can you do to make all of the other people who live in England feel at home there? A few bus trips for Moslem women to English villages is not enough, nor are a few specials on BBC, the catch is that major societal change takes generations. It might be that the announced goal of 25% participation in a short period is unrealistic, but the time to start, on this and similar problems, was yesterday if any progress at all is to be made.
Feeling at home is very much the goal, being free to participate, or not, without emotional barriers being involved.
Fred
Forking this list as a way to make it more effective in its stated purpose is bound to be self-defeating for the simple reason (beyond the inability to effectively authenticate the gender of participants) that Wikipedia itself is not gender-segregated. Any single-gender project to close the gap is, IMO, bound to fail.
Informally, I also fear that a women-only list might be even less successful in empowering women on this list to find ways to overcome gender inequity on it. One woman who doesn't post much here, but with whom I correspond, told me the idea, particularly as Laura articulates it, just generally gives her a bad vibe, to the point that she'd avoid any women-only list because women who set them up basically have, in her experience, the ultimate goal of being Queen Bee and lording (ladying?) it over all the other women participating in ways they would never dare to do otherwise if they knew men would become aware of it.
Daniel Case
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 15:56, Daniel and Elizabeth Case dancase@frontiernet.net wrote:
Forking this list as a way to make it more effective in its stated purpose is bound to be self-defeating for the simple reason (beyond the inability to effectively authenticate the gender of participants) that Wikipedia itself is not gender-segregated. Any single-gender project to close the gap is, IMO, bound to fail.
Informally, I also fear that a women-only list might be even less successful in empowering women on this list to find ways to overcome gender inequity on it. One woman who doesn't post much here, but with whom I correspond, told me the idea, particularly as Laura articulates it, just generally gives her a bad vibe, to the point that she'd avoid any women-only list because women who set them up basically have, in her experience, the ultimate goal of being Queen Bee and lording (ladying?) it over all the other women participating in ways they would never dare to do otherwise if they knew men would become aware of it.
I've just written, and deleted, several responses to this. :)
It's true that women can be other women's worst critics. I have no answers for it. But I think when discussing this kind of issue we should try to AGF. I know of only one women-only list set up on WP, and the woman who did it had the very best of intentions.
Sarah
Marc, I don't think you're improving the "communication problem" you describe by telling people their ideas are "nonsense", "self-serving", or "insulting". Yes, Laura's ideas are challenging, but getting overly defensive doesn't help the discussion.
Kaldari
On 3/16/11 1:58 PM, Marc Riddell wrote:
*From: *Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net *Date: *Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:49:32 -0400 *To: *Laura Hale laura@fanhistory.com *Subject: *Re: [Gendergap] Proposal: Forking gendergap: Main list for women and transgender, sublist for male supporters
Laura, your interpretation of my words is strikingly self-serving, and your solutions would serve to widen whatever gap exists in the Project. This entire "problem" is not one of gender, but of individual persons having problems communicating with a particular group of other persons. My question to all of those who state that they have a problem communicating with, or feel intimidated by, a male in the venue of a mailing list such as this, is do you have the same problem in person? There are many, many strong, intelligent voices in the Wikipedia Project who also happen to be female. And to include them in this "gendergap", and suggest that this is strictly a gender issue, is an insult to them.
Marc
on 3/16/11 4:06 PM, Laura Hale at laura@fanhistory.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86@comcast.net> wrote: This is simply, nonsense! That is your opinion, and you're welcome to it. In my experience, there are two general groups of women: 1. One who welcome men as participants in events specifically targeting women, because the women feel the men can learn. 2. One who don't want men involved because they feel women should work towards their own self interests and that women behave differently around men. Don't you people realize that separating this List into two distinct ones would underline, reinforce and actually signify the very "gendergap" you are allegedly trying to resolve. This pretty much is why I think we need men off the list. While you're intending to or not, I'm reading this as "Don't you understand that the only way women can succeed it by having men involved! You need men!" If you're not intending to send the message: Women cannot succeed with out men!, then you may want to reconsider your wording. And I'd argue the opposite: Men have done an awful job at recruiting women to be involved with Wikipedia. The current problems exist because men have tried to "solve" this problem. This is people talking with people. If there is a female or male here who has a problem communicating with, or in the presence of, another gender - they do have a problem. Translation: "Women! You're the problem! If you could stop engaging in female modes of communication, we could fix this problem! " This list is NOT a general list for increasing the participation rates of people. If you want to have a list dedicated to generally increasing the participation rates of people on Wikipedia, then fork off and do that. But a website Mailing List such as this is not the place to resolve it. Am I supposed to interpret this as you claiming that this list has a mission that will never succeed because it acknowledges there are gender differences and different approaches are needed to get different audiences? As a woman, a representative of a minority group on Wikipedia, how am I supposed to respond to you? I can tell you that this post of yours makes me feel distinctly uncomfortable posting to this list. It seems to put men in the position of power above women, demanding that women participate only in male modes of communication, that women on the list can't talk about genuine concerns they have as women because they are going to get blown off, and that feelings of men on the list are more important then women.
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Hey,
I am new on this list, not from the US and not that much involved in a particular wikipedia community. Anyway, I second every word Laura Hale has said so far. There are some male persons here, commenting almost every single email without contributing and that's tiring. There are also some men, who don't really listen to or even actually dismiss womens' concerns and seemingly the whole purpose of this list (putting gendergap in quotes as if it's not a real problem). And last but not least some men got quite defensive when this was pointed out, and, instead of taking a step back, started getting aggressive.
As far as I noticed, the idea to fork the list wasn't framed as a magic bullet but as a means to have a safe space for women to talk about the gender gap and how to tackle it. Unfortunately, quite a few of the responses really did drive home the need for such a safe space. So far, this list seemed rather preoccupied with debating its usefulness and some mens' conceptions and feelings than working towards its purpose.
If you're serious about recognising about women and their opinions, start by doing so, full stop.
Sincerely, Helga
PS: "Throwing a hissy fit” is, as urban dictionary puts it, “often used to describe female anger at something trivial” and as such quite a loaded and sexist proverb. It's demeaning towards women in implicating they're concerns are less vaild and important than men's. On a list discussing gender-related issues I'ld rather not work with people accusing me of such.
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 18:18, Helga Hansen helga@maedchenmannschaft.net wrote:
As far as I noticed, the idea to fork the list wasn't framed as a magic bullet but as a means to have a safe space for women to talk about the gender gap and how to tackle it. Unfortunately, quite a few of the responses really did drive home the need for such a safe space. So far, this list seemed rather preoccupied with debating its usefulness and some mens' conceptions and feelings than working towards its purpose. ... [snip]
PS: "Throwing a hissy fit” is, as urban dictionary puts it, “often used to describe female anger at something trivial” and as such quite a loaded and sexist proverb. It's demeaning towards women in implicating they're concerns are less vaild and important than men's. On a list discussing gender-related issues I'ld rather not work with people accusing me of such.
It's important to say something when men use words that make us uncomfortable; otherwise how else can they know? But it's also important to be kind, because the intentions are often good, especially on a list like this.
I had a dear friend, a man in his 60s, one of the kindest people you could meet. We were in the office one day, and he saw a woman standing with a baby looking lost, so he asked her "who are you here with, my dear?" intending to help. She exploded, because the implication was she couldn't be staff or someone there for a professional meeting. She must be "with someone," because she was a woman with a child. He was so shocked by her response that a tear came to his eye.
So we have to avoid tears here. :) But guys, please listen when women say there are issues with language and approach. I've seen a few posts on this list that have made me wince. I've not said anything only because I'm so used to it, and I don't want to start criticizing people and trying to silence them. But the issues are real.
Please *do* mentally insert Blacks instead of women when you post, and Whites instead of men. It really can reveal fissures in thinking.
Sarah