[Gendergap] [Gendergap : A suggestion: Towards 100.000 F. articles in Wikipedia

[Miguelinito]

Well, what Patricia said is that, historically, "women primarily avoided the use of violence and war". And it's true! That's not the same as "men are by default warlike barbarians". It's like if I say: "we have a tail bone, which prehistorically was a tail", and I deduce that we have a tail like monkeys. I don't know if history could have been different, for example, with men taking care of the family and women fighting, but I'm inclined to think not. :)

Miguel Ángel

> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:19 PM, patricia morales
> <mariadelcarmenpatricia at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear Oliver,

> I believe it is constructive to reply you, for improving the quality of dialogue.

> When I use the world `female-friendly space what I  is inclusive,
> constructive, a dialogue (following the rules of argumentation) that allows scientific articles, ea.
>  
> Take a look at these examples:
>  
> If we talk about a child-friendly hotel we refer to a family hotel
> where the space is adequate for every member of the family (we don’t
> talk about a kindergarten or about a niche). It is talked about a
> place that meets the challenge of a deficit or historical gap.
>  
> Other interesting examples are:
>  
> Women-friendly companies (for ex. Dell, HP, Abbot, ea. taking needs of working mothers)
>  
> Child-friendly justice (initiative by the European Council for giving better access to justice)
>  
> When I talked about historical gaps (I talked from an historical
> point of view and not about Wikipedia)...

> I have the impression that my words in your reply were
> unintentionally modified and lost the original sense of the proposal.
> If you read with more time and without adding meanings or changing
> words my suggestions, it would be better for improving them. It is
> about maximise efforts and get better results.

  
> That's fair enough - as it happens, that language wasn't the
> language I was opposed to. Your statement that "I believe that the
> leadership of this process has to be in various female hands, taking
> solidarity as a major principle. When we take a look at history, we
> can see that women primarily avoid the use of violence and war" was
> the awkward one, and the one that led to a critique of what sounded
> like gender-dominant segregation. We cannot and should not and won't
> even consider excluding women from this process, but suggesting
> that, by default, women should be prima facie assumed to be more
> useful in the process than men (and for that matter that men are by
> default warlike barbarians) is not going to help matters.