Hello all,
I've been on the gender gap mailing list for a number of months now but have yet to introduce myself. While I tend to default to Wikipedia often when I want quick information on something, I never considered the possibility of editing until reading about the gender gap issue. It was at this point I came across the African American Woman Suffrage Movement article and tried to clean it up a bit. While rewarding, I didn't have the sources to try and expand on it but I hope to do so in the future.
While to some extent I subscribe to the idea that there are many women out there who fall into the category of "not having the free time", I fall into a much different category that was discussed a few months back (and which I only read yesterday - I tend to let the digests pile up and read them all at once!!): Women that are technically savvy and do have some free time. At times I am an avid blogger and the Wikipedia technology is easy and fun for me to learn as I go. I often have a number of things I need to or want to do with my time and prioritize accordingly. Wikipedia is low in that list of priorities.
I have a hard time articulating why that is. To some degree it is both function and attitude. After editing the Suffrage Movement article, I found myself wanting to continue contributing. Yet the time I allotted to Wikipedia really only allowed me to do things such as suggesting new articles or categorizing their class/importance for something like the Women's History project. As Sydney (I believe) mentioned a few emails back about cleaning up the commons, it felt like such an endless, tedious task and eventually I lost interest altogether.
As for attitude, I don't mean to insult when I say this, merely to explain. When I was in graduate school I was frustrated with the idea that I should be editing Wikipedia - here is a site that seems "a joke" in academic circles (the ever so common "Wikipedia is NOT a source!!" from professors, exasperated that we should know better), I am steeped in information that actually "matters" every day, why in the heck am I going to bother with Wikipedia?! Given the sheer amount of use Wikipedia gets not only in general, but from me as well illustrates how much it truly matters and why it's all the more important to make sure information is portrayed in an accurate manner. In addition, the greater interest academics are actually taking in Wikipedia proves me wrong as well.
LASTLY, in terms of having a more diverse representation of female bodies - one might look up pictures of the World Naked Bike Ride. It was fascinating to me to see all different shapes and sizes, as bodies in the US media are often airbrushed paragons of "perfection." I don't know anything about rights to photos and such though I have a (male) friend who participates every year and is quite open with the pictures he appears in. If permission is necessary, perhaps the women who have participated would be quite happy to oblige.
I am going to Urubamba, Peru at the end of the month for 3 months and I see that the article could use some work. I look forward to improving it!! I appreciate the care that those of you on this list put into trying to remedy the gender gap, as well as examining whether topics on Wikipedia are being skewed to reflect a patriarchal bias.
Erin (User Gwytherinn)
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 13:32, Erin O'Rourke gwytherinn@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all,
I've been on the gender gap mailing list for a number of months now but have yet to introduce myself. While I tend to default to Wikipedia often when I want quick information on something, I never considered the possibility of editing until reading about the gender gap issue. It was at this point I came across the African American Woman Suffrage Movement article and tried to clean it up a bit. While rewarding, I didn't have the sources to try and expand on it but I hope to do so in the future.
While to some extent I subscribe to the idea that there are many women out there who fall into the category of "not having the free time", I fall into a much different category that was discussed a few months back (and which I only read yesterday - I tend to let the digests pile up and read them all at once!!): Women that are technically savvy and do have some free time. At times I am an avid blogger and the Wikipedia technology is easy and fun for me to learn as I go. I often have a number of things I need to or want to do with my time and prioritize accordingly. Wikipedia is low in that list of priorities.
I have a hard time articulating why that is. To some degree it is both function and attitude. After editing the Suffrage Movement article, I found myself wanting to continue contributing. Yet the time I allotted to Wikipedia really only allowed me to do things such as suggesting new articles or categorizing their class/importance for something like the Women's History project. As Sydney (I believe) mentioned a few emails back about cleaning up the commons, it felt like such an endless, tedious task and eventually I lost interest altogether.
As for attitude, I don't mean to insult when I say this, merely to explain. When I was in graduate school I was frustrated with the idea that I should be editing Wikipedia - here is a site that seems "a joke" in academic circles (the ever so common "Wikipedia is NOT a source!!" from professors, exasperated that we should know better), I am steeped in information that actually "matters" every day, why in the heck am I going to bother with Wikipedia?! Given the sheer amount of use Wikipedia gets not only in general, but from me as well illustrates how much it truly matters and why it's all the more important to make sure information is portrayed in an accurate manner. In addition, the greater interest academics are actually taking in Wikipedia proves me wrong as well.
LASTLY, in terms of having a more diverse representation of female bodies - one might look up pictures of the World Naked Bike Ride. It was fascinating to me to see all different shapes and sizes, as bodies in the US media are often airbrushed paragons of "perfection." I don't know anything about rights to photos and such though I have a (male) friend who participates every year and is quite open with the pictures he appears in. If permission is necessary, perhaps the women who have participated would be quite happy to oblige.
I am going to Urubamba, Peru at the end of the month for 3 months and I see that the article could use some work. I look forward to improving it!! I appreciate the care that those of you on this list put into trying to remedy the gender gap, as well as examining whether topics on Wikipedia are being skewed to reflect a patriarchal bias.
Erin (User Gwytherinn)
-- Erin O'Rourke http://erin-orourke.com
Hello Erin, thanks for that introduction, and welcome to the mailing list! :)
Sarah
Recently two users I thought were he's turned out to be she's. And then I identified a user with a neutral sounding name as a he - though looking again at name, probably is a she.
Then it occurred to me, why assume they are male anyway?
Why not call all neutral user names she from now on?
He is part of she. Male is part of female. Man is part of woman.
Hmmm... how much "trouble" will I get in if I do it??
Carol in dc
I actually would love to follow the reactions of people when you call them "she" and you're wrong. How would they reply?
Kaldari says he's been called "she" a number of times! :)
Sarah
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:37 PM, carolmooredc@verizon.net wrote:
Recently two users I thought were he's turned out to be she's. And then I identified a user with a neutral sounding name as a he - though looking again at name, probably is a she.
Then it occurred to me, why assume they are male anyway?
Why not call all neutral user names she from now on?
He is part of she. Male is part of female. Man is part of woman.
Hmmm... how much "trouble" will I get in if I do it??
Carol in dc
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Having just now read through a long paragraph on ANI of a user saying he or she and him or her about an editor, I say, for less complexities sake, let's do it. See what happens.
On 9/8/2011 12:48 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
I actually would love to follow the reactions of people when you call them "she" and you're wrong. How would they reply?
Kaldari says he's been called "she" a number of times! :)
Sarah
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:37 PM, <carolmooredc@verizon.net mailto:carolmooredc@verizon.net> wrote:
Recently two users I thought were he's turned out to be she's. And then I identified a user with a neutral sounding name as a he - though looking again at name, probably is a she. Then it occurred to me, why assume they are male anyway? Why not call all neutral user names she from now on? He is part of she. Male is part of female. Man is part of woman. Hmmm... how much "trouble" will I get in if I do it?? Carol in dc
I'm game. This will be fun, especially with my pals on Commons ;-)
Sent via iPhone - I apologize in advance for my shortness or errors! :)
On Sep 8, 2011, at 1:27 PM, carolmooredc@verizon.net wrote:
Having just now read through a long paragraph on ANI of a user saying he or she and him or her about an editor, I say, for less complexities sake, let's do it. See what happens.
On 9/8/2011 12:48 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
I actually would love to follow the reactions of people when you call them "she" and you're wrong. How would they reply?
Kaldari says he's been called "she" a number of times! :)
Sarah
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:37 PM, carolmooredc@verizon.net wrote: Recently two users I thought were he's turned out to be she's. And then I identified a user with a neutral sounding name as a he - though looking again at name, probably is a she.
Then it occurred to me, why assume they are male anyway?
Why not call all neutral user names she from now on?
He is part of she. Male is part of female. Man is part of woman.
Hmmm... how much "trouble" will I get in if I do it??
Carol in dc
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Having just now read through a long paragraph on ANI of a user saying he or she and him or her about an editor, I say, for less complexities sake, let's do it. See what happens.
Feel free. I'm going to continue to use "they", which usually fits without violating gender grammar too much.
Fred
Feel free. I'm going to continue to use "they", which usually fits without violating gender grammar too much.
I use "they" when referring to the third person of a gender-unknown someone I'm not expecting to join the conversation and "s/he" when I am (possibly as a prod to clarification on said person's part). I don't think "xe", which some people have tried to use, really works ... people often think that it was a typo, and the first time I saw it at the head of a sentence I scratched my head and wondered what xenon had to do with any of this.
Daniel Case