[Gendergap] Hello and a (small!) manifesto

[Lena ...]

On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at fairpoint.net> wrote:
> As to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogtie_bondage there is no question
> that people do this, but it is hard to see an overriding public interest
> in need for information as is present in say, anal sex.
>
> Bukkake is at least interesting. I guess all of this stuff can be
> justified on that basis, seeing how the other half lives, so to speak.

For me, the main problem with the picture is not that they're very
explicit (because, well, it's about sex), but that there are no
pictures of men.

There are 5 photos (why do you need 5 anyway?) illustrating the
article on bondage, all are depicting women. Since bondage is about
being submissive, this implies women are generally or "normally" the
ones being submissive, which is not true and not a good thing to
suggest to your readers. Also, it clearly shows who chose the
pictures: men*. It's the so-called "male gaze":
http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/faq-what-is-the-“male-gaze”/

For me, looking at the article feels like sneaking into a men's club,
where (heterosexual) men watch pornography depicting people like me
and show it to each other. It doesn't feel like it's also a place
designed for the people like me, I'm only supposed to be depicted on
the pictures, not to look at them.
So I feel unwell looking at it, but that's not because the pictures
are explicit. I would be fine with it if two or three pictures where
pictures of restrained men.

Similar problem with the article on bukkake. It says: "The practice
then spread to gay pornography, in which several men ejaculate on
another man.[5]Pornographic use of the word has been expanded by the
lesbian bukkake genre in which several women ejaculate on another
woman.[13]"
So why are there only pictures of women, and why does the introduction
to the article say "Bukkake is a sexual act in which a woman is
ejaculated on by several men"?
(Actually, there are also men on the pictures in this case, but the
pictures are clipped so you only see a very, very small part of their
bodys. It's clearly about the women.)

Looking at these articles, it just doesn't feel like Wikipedia is from
people for people, but like it's a boys for boys service. So why
should I feel encouraged to participate? (Except by sending a photo of
me naked...)

* (this might be heteronormative, of course the pictures might also be
nice for lesbians)

Best,
Lena