[Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on, Wikimedia Commons

[The Richardsons]

Message: 7
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 10:37:41 -0600 (MDT)
From: "Fred Bauder"<fredbaud at fairpoint.net>
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on
	Wikimedia Commons
To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects"
	<gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org>
Message-ID:
	<44058.66.243.192.69.1305736661.squirrel at webmail.fairpoint.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1


> >  On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:16, Fred Bauder<fredbaud at fairpoint.net>
> >  wrote:
> >
>> >>
>>> >>  >  My point is this: a significant number of women (current and
>> >>  potential
>>> >>  >  editors) don't want to work in a "I like the big tits" atmosphere,
>>> >>  >  whatever
>>> >>  >  was meant by it. Others don't mind. Point is that some*do*  mind.
>> >>
> >
> >
>> >>  So, was it an inane remark or a symptom of an atmosphere? I'm pretty
>> >>  sure
>> >>  you don't want to see an authoritarian crackdown either. We come down
>> >>  heavy on Wikipedia sometimes, but for much more egregious behavior.
>> >>
>> >>  The problem is that such moves don't change culture, in fact, may
>> >>  sometimes facilitate it, if traction can be gained by aggrieved users
>> >>  who
>> >>  feel they are being treated unfairly.
> >
> >
> >  I see it as an inane remark that's symptomatic of the culture, in the
> >  sense
> >  that the poster thought it appropriate to post it.
> >
> >  Moving away from discussing this image now, to the broader issue, we do
> >  see
> >  a fair number of comments like that on Wikipedia, and letting them pass
> >  without comment simply means they'll never stop.
> >
> >  We had a situation recently where we were discussing a BLP, and part of
> >  the
> >  content was that the woman had experienced a serious sexual assault. In
> >  the
> >  course of discussing how to approach it, a couple of remarks were made
> >  that
> >  tended to downplay what had happened to her, and one person -- in a
> >  different section on the talk page -- commented on how attractive she
> >  was,
> >  and how he wanted to have her babies.
> >
> >  I was so disgusted by this that I felt (and to some extent still feel)
> >  that
> >  I didn't want to be involved in the project anymore, because why am I
> >  wasting my time in that kind of atmosphere? I felt that it said something
> >  about me, rather than about them.
> >
> >  I also had to decide whether to say something, or let it lie, and if I
> >  did
> >  say something, I had to make sure I was polite and circumspect, rather
> >  than
> >  screaming it from the rooftops, which is what I wanted to do. And it
> >  suddenly felt like nothing had changed in the last 40 years, that these
> >  remarks still appear, and that women are still made to feel bad if they
> >  challenge them. And if we do challenge them, must be extra polite about
> >  it.
> >  Not make a fuss.
> >
> >  So that felt kind of depressing.
> >
> >  Sarah
Now we're getting down to a serious discussion. The actual horns of the
dilemma a Wikipedia administrator is in. In a way being limited to text
fails to communicate the immediate expression of disgust that would
happen in a face-to-face situation, so there is a failure to communicate
feedback effectively. A polite note fails.

Fred

------------------------------------------------------------------------



Although I do encourage Sarah to speak her mind, I encourage her not to "scream it from the rooftops" because this could start a flame war. I definitely would not do that if I were you. But you also, as you said, not be too polite. Don't sugar coat things." That's my opinion I have never stumbled upon that on Wikipedia (I don't contribute especially often), and I hope I never do. However if I do, I will be sure to say something.
--With well wishes.
RDW2210


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20110520/62df7472/attachment.htm