[Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 8, Issue 76

Sat Oct 1 18:39:56 UTC 2011

Béria,

every single post from you to this list or the foundation list was rude,
impolite, disrespectful and sometimes openly aggressive. You never explained
what the alleged “lies” are, you called other people ass kissers and so on.
Could you please behave in a manner that makes it possible to read this list
without distaste?

Regards

Ralph – who usually doesn’t contribute to this list

Von: gendergap-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:gendergap-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] Im Auftrag von Béria Lima
Gesendet: Samstag, 1. Oktober 2011 18:39
An: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects
Betreff: Re: [Gendergap] Gendergap Digest, Vol 8, Issue 76

Ok. I said to myself that I would not answer that personal attack, but seens
that you people want to. So lets go answer your "questions" Ms. Maggie
(sorry if is offensive not threat you for your last name, but you never said
it, so). I do should advice that my politeness will not be present in this
mail, so if someone get offended, I'm sorry.

I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of
"girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to
women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.

First, you need to read my mail again. I never said female voices does not
matter. Read again and them come back to talk. And I do reffer man as boys
as well, If you knew me a bit more you would know that.

Many women, like myself, get driven off of WP due to frustration with the
hierarchy, which does exist. Women are treated with less respect, women are
questioned for their motives, women are called prudish if they object to
sexualizing images--or they are told their voices are not important because
they only comprise 9% of the population.

I'm a woman (or girl) and a Wikipedian for 5 years. I know exactly how we
are treated there. And the funny part of it, is that you are complaining
that they question your motives, but you have no problems questioning mine.
Funny how is easy to do when is not with you right?

Why do you think they only comprise 9% then?

Your hero Sue wrote a post about that in November. Read it.

My goal on WP is to make it more diverse, and TBH I'm not too into this
picture discussion that has gone on for months. But it doesn't mean that it
doesn't matter or it isn't an important one, and it doesn't mean that the
women who care about it aren't important.

So if you are about make it more diverse you should not be trying to push
people away. Remember that girls are only 9% of us, and even the ones who
don't agree with you are important.

Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I
can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry
that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on
the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere,
their voices do not matter. As for badly written? My god that is the worst
you can say? In writing terms that is just snide and a low blow. Basically,
only someone who can think of no other insult would say this. "Well it's
badly written and has spelling mistakes!" 

I'm sorry but that is your hero's Sue arguments, not mine. And I DON'T
subscribe them.

Come on, get a fucking life.

Works both ways. And get a manners teacher who will teach you to not offend
other people.

Wikipedia is set up so that only people who look for these articles/pictures
will know about voting procedures. So of course if there is a vote, the
majority would probably be overall positive unless serious canvassing went
on to let people who care about the other side know about it so it evens
out. Canvassing is set up to prevent this--I believe it's actually a way of
biasing the community to serve only the community, and not the readers.
Because the readers are--the world. Telling people about the topic is just
like how any election goes. I guess unless you are in some sort of fake
election where people are led to believe that their votes actually count.

Canvassing works good when are you people doing to remove images from
Wikipedia (I can pull of at least 4 treads in that ML for that from the top
of my mind). If you think canvassing solves things, I'm not the one with
priorities changed.

Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you
disagree with her opinion.

If you read the mail - I think you didn't - you would say that says in the
begin that is a answer to ERIK, not to her. There is no point talk with
someone who don't answer you back, and Ms. Garden send me a mail saying that
she will not answer any of my mails.

Obviously you are not part of this group for the interest of women, 

Why? Because I don't kiss Sue's ass? To "be part of the group" I need to
soulless ass-kisser?  

otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion

Again, go read my mail (or learn English, whatever works for you)

---so why are you subscribing???

Because I want to. Is a open list, and I want to be here, If you have a
problem with my presence, unsubscribe. 

_____
Béria Lima
Wikimedia Portugal <http://wikimedia.pt> 
(351) 963 953 042

Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre
acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a
fazer.

On 1 October 2011 16:34, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch at gmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Maggie <rockerrepro at gmail.com> wrote:

@Beria
I'm not clear what point you are trying to prove, other than the 9% of
"girls'" voices don't matter. I also find it questionable that you refer to
women as girls and don't hesitate ponder why you don't call men boys.

I notice a few people do that. I often find myself re-reading statements to
figure out if writers are indeed talking about girls (under the age 18) or
grown women. 

Offense is not the reason here, IMO. Offense barely scratches the surface. I
can imagine that many of the people on this list are angry--they are angry
that women are being objectified and because women are in the minority on
the community and it's an uninviting, sometimes terribly creepy atmosphere,
their voices do not matter. 

+1 I'm pissed, to be frank.  I also notice there are is still a nice and
small amount of women who are really rude also also, especially to other
women. Like this is some territorial thing. (I'm also getting that complaint
from the survey!)

Come on, get a fucking life.

Maggie - how come you and I haven't met yet? <3

Nowhere did you prove that she lied in that article. You only stated how you
disagree with her opinion. Obviously you are not part of this group for the
interest of women, otherwise you would care about that 9%'s opinion---so why
are you subscribing???

This is a problem we occasionally have in the gender gap room. Why hang out
and tell us that you think feminism sucks and that this is one big scheme
for special treatment and "affirmative action" and then hang out and wonder
why we freak the hell out on you in the IRC room. /facepalm

-Sarah

-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia <http://www.glamwiki.org> 
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>  
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting

Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sarahstierch.com/

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap at lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20111001/82124710/attachment-0001.htm 