Hi, "Marc Dequènes (duck)" <d...@duckcorp.org> writes:
[snip] > So apart from objectification of women, but without > instrumentalization or degrading message, I was not able to find > serious consequences. As much as I would prefer things to be different > (I already told upstream in the past) I don't feel I have any right or > special wisdom allowing me to dictate people to act and think > differently. Banning content because it displease me and make people > uncomfortable while no direct harm has been found is unlikely to have > a positive effect. Consequently unless harmful content I'm not aware > of is discovered in this package I am not going to remove it from the > archive. I would consider adding a neutral warning message in the > package description though, so people can individually decide for > themselves if this is acceptable from their own point of view. With respect, I think your analysis is seriously flawed. As has been pointed out in this thread (by Miriam, for instance[0]), there is harm from the sexualised atmosphere that weboob contributes to[1]. That you, as a man, don't perceive that harm is, I'm afraid, part of the problem. You should listen to women's experiences (and the harm they experience), and accept that they are authoritative in this regard. Therefore, you should rename the offensive parts of this package. There is a general point here, that people in the majority often fail to appreciate the harm done to minorities, but I don't think now is the place to belabour it. > I'll be coming at DebConf this year. Feel free to come and discuss it > with me. I'm afraid I won't be at DebConf, so email will have to do :) Regards, Matthew [0] As she points out, women shouldn't have to weigh in on every thread of this sort. [1] For more on this, see http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Sexualized_environment which I think has already been mentioned in this thread -- "At least you know where you are with Microsoft." "True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle." http://www.debian.org
