[Gendergap] How to increase women's participation on Wikipedia

Thu Mar 17 09:47:29 UTC 2011

Hello there

I stumbled on this list yesterday. I am surprised to see this thread about
accusations of sexism, this list has very few active female editors from
Wikipedia. If you want to remove everyone else, it would be limited to 5
whole women.

I found the tone of this post was very condescending to men. You do realize
that women are not the smallest minority on Wikipedia, consider the
implication of your allegations if the focus of this disparity was based on
race or ethnicity.

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Laura Hale <laura at fanhistory.com> wrote:

> My understanding is this list is about increasing women's participation
> rates on Wikipedia, relative to the participation rates of men.  There are
> two days to do this: 1) Encourage existing male participants to stop
> contributing to Wikipedia, or 2) Encourage women to participate on Wikipedia
> at rates higher than Wikipedia acquires new male contributors.
>

You seem to be going for the 1st approach I see.

>
> For this list to work, the policies need to be structured around the needs
> of women.  The needs of men are clearly being met, as their participation
> rates are around 87%.  Beyond that, men need to learn the following and the
> following things need to be done:
>
> 1.  They are not being discriminated on this list.  Women have not said men
> suck, men should die, men aren't needed, Wikipedia would be better off with
> out men, men don't have anything to offer.  Men are not being discriminated
> against.  When men on this say this or imply this, they create an
> environment on a list dedicated to getting women involved that runs counter
> to the list's mission.
>

The first two lines are in conflict with each other, "Women have not
said....men aren't needed, Wikipedia would be better off with out men" .
Gender disparity is the problem, if not for the participation of men alleged
to be at 87%, this list would be shared by 5 other active female editors.

>
> 2.  Men need to realize that if they are present on the list, they are here
> to learn.  It runs counter to the group's mission of decreasing the
> gendergap when men operate from a place of privilege.  This means, men need
> to stop saying gender doesn't matter and women should get over it.  (If that
> was the case, this list wouldn't exist.  If that was the case, we'd have gay
> marriage.  If this was the case, the media wouldn't care about the low rates
> of female participation rates.)  The whole conversation started with a
> discussion aimed at women on the list about the problems created by some
> participants. The men on the list, rather than say: Huh, I never considered
> that women might feel that way... immediately jumped on the bandwagon to say
> WE ARE BEING DISCRIMINATED AGAINST.  I DO NOT UNDERSTAND, NOR DO I ACCEPT
> THE OPINION OF WOMEN.  ALSO, GET OVER YOURSELF.  If men are really here to
> learn, as people like Fred and others have said, they learn by listening.
> They learn by asking questions.  They do not learn by telling women that
> they are wrong.   (Which is what the dogpile of men crying discrimination
> was and hurt the list's credibility and the list's mission.)
>

There are a couple of assumptions you are making, first dividing the entire
list in two groups, not all women on this list share your opinion to begin
with. Before focusing on the race of 'man' as one monolithic entity, maybe
consider that not all women agree with your view. You are asking all the men
on this list to either leave or agree with your perspective and learn. Both
are examples of discrimination, they are here to be supportive, most are
foundation employees who have a vested interest in the topic, they should be
looked at facilitators and supporters instead of bulked in one group.

>
> 3.  Men need to realize that if this list is to be successful, they need to
> recruit women. People of all genders need to reach out to women and
> encourage them to join.  This list is fundamentally about decreasing the
> gendergap.  The only way the gendergap will decrease is if women get
> involved.  If men need to stay (because they feel discriminated against and
> those icky women need to learn to work with men because that's what is best
> for them and the only way that men feel increasing participation rates will
> increase), then they need to go out and encourage every woman they know to
> join the list, encourage them to talk about why they do or don't edit
> Wikipedia, and then encourage these new women that they've recruited to
> recruit more of their female acquaintences to join.

Yup, you should start.

>
> 4.  Men need to realize that for this movement to work, women's needs need
> to be prioritized above their own.  If you feel discriminated against, it is
> understandable... but your feelings of being discriminated against are
> irrelevant in this context.  This list is not titled "teachingmen" or
> "makingmenfeelgoodaboutwomen".  The purpose of this list is not to create
> dialog to teach men about gender issues.  If men on this list genuinely want
> to learn, there are plenty of resources available on the Internet (or
> resources that could be created on Wikiversity) to teach men about
> feminism.  This list is not about men's needs.  In the context of this list,
> men's needs as man need to be made secondary.
>

Hmm this is again in direct conflict with #2, I thought men were here to
learn. You have been arguing to fork the list and in effect, close any
dialog between men and women. You are not realizing the core issue here,
without men's participation this list would be almost dead composed of 5
participants, same for Wikipedia. That is the symptom of the disease,
removing men from the equation would remove most form of participation.

>
> 5.  Men need to ask themselves: What are the public relations implications
> of my statements regarding female participation rates on Wikipedia?  Erik's
> comment saying we need a male and female moderator is a nightmare.  How
> would this go over on a feminist blog?  Like a bag of stones.  (In this
> case, probably with Erik's body and tossed overboard by feminists.)
> Michael's comment saying women need to act like men, and that the only way
> for women to participate on Wikipedia is to act like men (which is exactly
> how his comment of WOMEN SHOULD ACT LIKE PEOPLE reads.  Pretend that Michael
> was white.  Then pretend that Michael said that African Americans or
> Aboriginals could participate correctly if they stopped acting like African
> Americans or Aboriginals and instead acted like people, RE: WHITE PEOPLE WHO
> ARE THE DOMINANT GROUP.)
>

You seem to be overlooking the context yourself, this isn't a feminist blog
or a list dedicated to broad feminist issues, the context is Wikipedia. I
think its only natural to have Foundation staff present. I didn't find
anything wrong with a single statement Erik has made on this list, his
suggestion was only that, a suggestion. You are free to disagree with him or
anyone.

>
> There are some very well meaning guys on this list.  I've chatted with them
> on G!Talk and IRC.  They are very emphatic with the position of women,
> realizing that women have these issues.  They've been watching, reading and
> learning quietly.  They've been offering support offlist for projects.
>
> The vocal men on the list are not learning these things.  The adminstrators
> are not stepping in and correcting sexists comments. The list has stopped
> being about decreasing the gendergap and instead become about addressing
> men's needs or general needs that are not specific to women.  If these men
> on the list can't be quiet, can't stop insisting that they are being
> discriminated against, can't start helping by quietly going about their
> business of helping when asked...
>

Now asking for administrative action to silence out the voices that disagree
with you, you clearly haven't read Foundation-l. Some of the other "vocal
men" have, I don't think any of them has crossed that line. So far, you are
the only one making accusations on this list and calling for removal of
others. Whatever your opinion maybe neither of those things are going to be
productive.

>
> ... then this list is a failure.
>

Maybe so, but making it less inclusive is not going to help.

>
>
>
> --
> twitter: purplepopple
> blog: ozziesport.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
Elizabeth

-- 
Oops, my karma ran over your dogma.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20110317/b9acaf44/attachment-0001.htm 