Andreas - you seem to have the belief that the pervasive exposure to pornography is having an adverse effect on community dynamics, and in particular is having a negative impact on the recruitment of women editors. Perhaps you might want to consider whether your pervasive discussions of pornography aren't having a similar effect.
This is a great way to kill a thread, when twice in the last few hours, members of this forum have striven to redirect threads from the topic of pornography. Risker/Anne On 31 May 2012 20:28, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: > John, > > Fine. Here's some research ideas for you: > > 1. Collect (or analyse existing) demographic data about the proportion of > > - single males/females > - males/females in a relationship > - married males/females > > - males/females with children > - childless males/females > > within the contributor populations of different Internet sites – from > 4chan to Wikimedia to Reddit to Facebook to Twitter etc. > > Make sure to include some sites like Pinterest that are predominantly > female. > > 2. Rate visibility and in-your-face-ness of pornography, glamour shots and > nudity-related discussions on each of these sites. > > 3. Determine overall female vs. male participation level on each site. > > Analyse the data to see whether sites with high matter-of-course > visibility of pornography, like 4chan, turn out to have the highest > proportion of single childless males, e.g., and the lowest proportion of > women contributors (married mothers, women in a relationship, single women, > etc.). > > Expressed as hypotheses: > > Null hypothesis: There is no discernible statistical correlation between > higher visibility of porn, a high proportion of single childless males in > the site's population, and low female participation levels (random cloud in > the scatter plots). > > Alternative hypothesis: There is a discernible statistical correlation > between higher visibility of porn, a higher proportion of single childless > males, and low female participation levels (clear trend lines visible in > the scatter plots). > > Perform regression analysis, calculate confidence levels etc. > > 4. As a bonus, ask survey participants about their views of the different > sites – what attracts or repels them, how various sites' attitudes to > censorship, presence or absence of glamour shots and pornography, freedom > to use abusive language, absence of abusive language etc. impact on their > decision to participate or not. > > If there are significant correlations in the data, and a higher proportion > of non-single or married men and fathers is correlated with higher female > participation levels, make clear to the community in which direction we > have to move to change both male demographics, and attract more women. > > Andreas > > > > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:08 PM, John Vandenberg <jay...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Andreas, >> >> ffs can we have one thread where we don't talk about porn. Or if you >> do think porn is a part of the gendergap, pose research questions >> which will help test your hypothesis, because that is what this thread >> is about. >> >> I want research questions I can put to real academics. >> Not bullshit hand-wavey assertions even if they are backed up by a >> 'citation'. >> >> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > The screenshots below are from a blog post by a girl geek going onto >> 4chan >> > /b/. >> > >> > http://boards.4chan.org/b/ (probably NSFW) >> > >> > 4chan is the site that gave Wikipedia and the world its lolcats, as >> well as >> > the saying, "There are no girls on the Internet." As you'll no doubt >> see if >> > you navigate to the above address, it is also full of anonymously posted >> > girlie pictures, not unlike parts of Wikimedia. One of the board's >> > catchphrases is, "Tits or GTFO". Rather male-centric, right? >> > >> > The Wikipedia article on 4chan is a featured article. (Why am I not >> > surprised ...) >> > >> > The following screenshots are SFW: >> > >> > >> http://cultureandcommunication.org/f09/tdm/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Picture-81.png >> > >> http://cultureandcommunication.org/f09/tdm/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Picture-9.png >> > >> http://cultureandcommunication.org/f09/tdm/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Picture-10.png >> > >> http://cultureandcommunication.org/f09/tdm/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Picture-11.png >> > >> > The following is the dialogue they show: >> > >> > ---o0o--- >> > >> > /b/abes get no love! I hate you, /b/. Where are the female /b/tards? >> > >> > in the kitchen. >> > >> > stop making these shit threads ... girls on /b/ are anon, and stay anon. >> > >> > i lol'd go make me a fucking sandwich >> > >> > If girls on /b/ are non and stay anon, why is anon assumed to be male by >> > default? Can we just purge all the cam whores, plz? >> > >> > making me a god damn sammwich >> > >> > make my sandwich silently >> > >> > im a girl,im in florida >> > >> > Tits or GTFO. Pic related. >> > >> > Girls on the Internet don't fucking exist. >> > >> > girl, why do you have a pc in the kitchen? >> > >> > female /b/tard here, trolling threads and not making samiches >> > >> > Oh silly, there are no girls on the internet >> > >> > ---o0o--- >> > >> > Now, this dialogue illustrates how anonymous uncensored porn and sexist >> > behaviour towards a woman can go together, and reinforce each other. >> > >> > The blog post the screenshots are taken from is here: >> > >> > >> http://cultureandcommunication.org/f09/tdm/elisaverna/wait-did-4chan-just-enlighten-me-i-feel-dirty/ >> > >> > Andreas >> > >> > >> > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Michael J. Lowrey < >> orangem...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> > Please consider the likelihood that there may be a correlation >> between >> >>> > the >> >>> > let-it-all-hang-out attitude towards porn, and the problem you >> describe >> >>> > as >> >>> > "sexualized behavior – sexist comments and bad manners". >> >>> > >> >>> > The let-it-all-hang-out approach towards porn is likely >> >>> > >> >>> > – to attract people who engage in "sexualized behavior – sexist >> >>> > comments and >> >>> > bad manners", and >> >>> > – to repel the type of people who would be "allies within the >> community >> >>> > to >> >>> > shoot down behaviour like that (civility!)". >> >>> > >> >>> > A more responsible and mainstream approach, on the other hand, is >> apt >> >>> > to >> >>> > repel the first and attract the second type of contributor. >> >>> >> >>> {{citation needed}} >> >>> >> >>> Unquestioned premises almost inevitably lead to false conclusions. In >> >>> this case, the unquestioned premise is that those who oppose >> >>> censorship are people who engage in (or at least tolerate) sexist >> >>> comments and bad manners, as opposed to the possibility that those who >> >>> people oppose censorship believe in opposing censorship as a matter of >> >>> principle. You are unilaterally defining opponents of censorship as >> >>> irresponsible, out of the mainstream, and unwilling to support >> >>> civility: again I say, {{citation needed}}! >> >>> >> >>> (I won't bother to ask for an apology.) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I'll work on a citation. But in my experience, the places that are most >> >> radically free speech, and most anti-censorship when it comes to porn, >> like >> >> parts of 4chan and reddit, are also places where the level of >> discourse goes >> >> way south. I don't think that is a particularly novel or contentious >> >> observation. >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Gendergap mailing list >> > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > >
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
