In Wikipedian fashion, let us stick to the published statement by
Wikimedia Israel without making unnecessary inferences. WMIL made a
positive statement to support equality, and we know that equality is
repeated in the Wikimedia Values and echoed in the developing future
strategy.[1][2]
The statement "Equality to every woman and man, regardless of gender,
sexual preference, religion, origin, or disability is a central value
in the international Wikimedia Movement" is not unreasonable. It is
hard to imagine that anyone disagreeing with this principle would be
able to personally support the current Wikimedia Values. It is also
correct to say that affiliates like the WMIL chapter add value to the
robustness and diversity of the global Wikimedia community by not
simply cloning the WMF values and strategy, but as part of their
reason to exist ensure that their programmes and strategies more
directly reflect the needs of their own members and community.
If anyone wants to work on this in detail, especially if they believe
that we can create and maintain an "inclusive culture"[1] and deliver
on "cultivate an environment where anyone can contribute safely, free
of harassment and prejudice"[2] while avoiding making positive
statements about equality, and choosing to stay silent about groups
including LGBT+ groups that suffer prejudice and discrimination by
their state because some may see that as unnecessarily political, then
I encourage them to talk this through by using logical and civil
discourse either during the current WMF driven strategy development
process or in consultation with local affiliate organizations.[3]
Though Wikimedia projects are not a free soapbox, our values guarantee
that critical voices are not silenced and rational on-topic discussion
is always welcome.
1. https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values#We_welcome_and_cherish_our_diff...
2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Direction#O...
3. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy
Cheers,
Fae
--
faewik@gmail.com
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 at 09:46, Mario Gómez
mariogomwiki@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I see.
>
> Yes. Part of the LGBTQ collective considers surrogacy to be related to
> their rights. I completely acknowledge that.
>
> Best,
>
> Mario
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 4:01 AM, Gregory Varnum
gregory.varnum@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> > I think you misunderstood my point there. ;)
> >
> > I was speaking to your comment that it was incorrectly labeled a LGBTQ
> > issue because of adoption. I did not mean to suggest no one is against
> > surrogacy or that they are not promoting adoption as an alternative. I was
> > indicating that to my knowledge those organizations are not telling
> > non-LGBTQ people that the laws are not of interest to them because they can
> > adopt. Looking at their sites, they seem to want all people (LGBTQ and
> > non-LGBTQ) to see it as related to their lives and rights.
> >
> > Again, I am not commenting here on if organizations should engage, just
> > pointing out that regardless of someone’s stance on the issue or this
> > action, the issue remains one of relevance to LGBTQ rights (and others) and
> > WMIL labeling it as a LGBTQ rights issue was accurate. :)
> >
> > -greg
> >
> > _______________
> > Sent from my iPhone - a more detailed response may be sent later.
> >
> > > On Jul 21, 2018, at 3:25 AM, Mario Gómez
mariogomwiki@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:56 AM, Gregory Varnum <
> > gregory.varnum@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> As far as it being an alternative, that is usually true, but it is also
> > >> true for non-LGBTQ families and I am not aware of viable political
> > >> movements successfully suggesting non-LGBTQ families should not worry
> > about
> > >> surrogacy laws as adoptions are an alternative option for them.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > Well, so you just met someone who suggests exactly that for non-LGBTQ
> > > families and who actively participates in campaigns against legalization
> > of
> > > surrogacy in his country.
> > >
> > > This is actually a position held by many organizations, just to name a
> > few:
> > > the "National Network Against Wombs for Rent" and the "We are not Pots"
> > > campaign in Spain or the "Mexican Feminists Against Wombs for Rent" in
> > > Mexico.
> > >
> > > These positions are also held by some feminist authors such as Kajsa Ekis
> > > Ekman, Sylviane Agacinski or Silvia Federici.
> > >
> > > My point is not trying to convince you of my position. I do not think
> > this
> > > is the right forum to debate politics beyond WMF mission. My point is
> > that
> > > if the WMF or its affiliates take such positions beyond its mission, it
> > > will be extremely damaging to the community, since this is just
> > alienating
> > > to all members of the community whose political positions do not match
> > > exactly WMF's framework (heavily influenced by US narrow ideological
> > > spectrum).
> > >
> > > I'm not asking for the WMF or its affiliates to be against surrogacy,
> > just
> > > the same way I don't ask for them to condemn apartheid policies against
> > > Muslims in Israel or the genocide in Gaza. I'm just asking the WMF and
> > its
> > > affiliates to acknowledge that we are a global and diverse community
> > united
> > > for a mission, and that entering into political advocacy beyond its
> > mission
> > > is detrimental to this global perspective and diversity.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Mario