[Foundation-l] hiding interlanguage links by default is a Bad Idea, part 2

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

Michael Snow wrote:
>
> Similarly, we know that the community population skews young and male. 
> That has important consequences, and some of those unfortunately 
> reinforce our lack of diversity. It's been pointed out what a 
> male-centric approach we sometimes have, in the enthusiasm and manner 
> with which certain subjects are covered, and the oblivious attitude 
> toward potential offensiveness of various images. This comes across to 
> all too many women as a hostile culture. Most large online communities 
> do not have the kind of gender imbalance we have. This is a serious 
> issue we need to address. The foundation could do targeted outreach 
> forever to recruit underrepresented groups (whether it's ethnicity, age, 
> gender, or other factors), and it would accomplish very little without 
> significant improvements in our culture.
>
>   

Well, yes and no.

Historically the first time the offensiveness of images
on wikipedia first came to a head (so to speak), was
the images on [[Clitoris]]. At least in that instance the
contributors who feigned the images as being offensive
to viewers -- while in many cases claiming *they* personally
weren't at all offended (!!) -- were predominantly male. My
recollection was/is that the defenders of a photographic
image on that page, instead of a schematic drawing, were
mostly female.

I don't deny the general point about the testosterone-laden
atmosphere in some areas of our community, but I do want
to note that even in the latest controversy over images, the
person on the Board of Trustees who came strongest in
defense of a unfettered retention of sensual images of
educational value was its (single?) female member. It
would be a serious mistake to claim that she was doing
so only to "fit in" with the lads.


Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen