The Postcolonial Digital Humanities tumbler did a great comic on this: http://dhpoco.tumblr.com/post/48828130277/were-full-maybe-you-should-join-t he-american
All best, Melanie ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Melanie Kill Asst Professor of English University of Maryland 2119 Tawes Hall College Park, MD 20742 mk...@umd.edu | @melaniekill >Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:21:36 -0700 >From: Sarah Stierch <sarah.stie...@gmail.com> >To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects > <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org> >Subject: [Gendergap] [PRESS] Women Novelists Wikipedia: Female Authors > Absent From Site's 'American Novelists' Page? >Message-ID: <51786900.50...@gmail.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" > > > From The Huffington Post > >http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/24/women-novelists-wikipedia-female- >authors-american_n_3149345.html > >Attention female authors: you may be being segregated from your male >peers on Wikipedia. On the online encyclopedia's "American Novelists" ><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_novelists> page, women >authors are hard to find. Instead they have been filed primarily under >"American Women Novelists." ><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_women_novelists> > >/Vanity Fair/ contributing editor Elissa Schappell ><https://twitter.com/ElissaSchappell> made this observation and posted >on Facebook Wednesday: > > Women Writers take heed, you are being erased on Wikipedia. It would > appear that in order to make room for male writers, women novelists > (such as Amy Tan, Harper Lee, Donna Tartt and 300 others) have been > moved off the "American Novelists" page and into the "American Women > Novelists" category. Not the back of the bus, or the kiddie table > exactly--except of course--when you google "American Novelists" the > list that appears is almost exclusively men (3,387 men). The > explanation on the pages is that the list of American Novelists is > too long, therefore sub-categories are necessary. > Idea: What about, "American Novelists with Penises" "American > Novelists Who Are Vastly Over-Rated and Over-Paid" or "American > Novelists Who Aren't Being Read But Should Be" (Here you'd find a > lot of women, people of color...) > > Want to see where you're sitting for eternity? Take a peek. > >A disclaimer at the top of the American Novelists page reads, "This >category may require frequent maintenance to avoid becoming too large. >It should directly contain very few, if any, articles and should mainly >contain subcategories." Schappell suggests that Wikipedia dealt with >this space issue by moving the female authors off the page. > >The Huffington Post reached out to Wikipedia for a response to >Schappell's claims but so far has not heard back. > >This is far from the first time that someone has expressed ire over the >"second-class" treatment of female authors. VIDA, an organization >dedicated to women in literary arts, pointed out that in 2011 the New >York Times Book Review <http://www.vidaweb.org/the-2011-count> printed >reviews of 520 male authors' books and only 273 books written by women. > >In a recent blog post on The Huffington Post, author Liza Palmer wrote >about thedouble standard that exists ><http://www.huffingtonpost.com/liza-palmer/all-books-are-equal-but-s_b_313 >1794.html> in >the literary world: > > All too often, when a woman writes a book about family and > relationships the reader will sigh that she felt the narrator's > inner monologues were "whiny" whereas when a male writer > contemplates these same topics he is being "introspective." If a > female writer uses humor in her dialogue she will be dismissed as > "snarky", whereas if a male writer uses humor, he has a "biting > wit." So called chick-lit writers get pinned with "predictable" > endings, while male writers writing about the same topics have > endings that are "satisfying." > >Perhaps it's time that Wikipedia realized that both men and women are >great American novelists and should show up when you search for them. > > >-- >/Sarah Stierch/* >Wikimedia Foundation Program Evaluation Community Coordinator >*Donate ><http://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=Donate/en&utm_source=&ut >m_medium=&utm_campaign=&language=en&uselang=en&country=US&referrer=http%3A >%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%26q%3D%26esrc%3Ds%26source%3 >Dweb%26cd%3D1%26ved%3D0CDMQFjAA%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fdonate.wikipedi >a.org%252F%26ei%3DYpsET93HN6isiQLIoJjSDg%26usg%3DAFQjCNG-7hzT9rkEvAjlNqBIO >Q1ZDIpdYA> >today and keep it free! > >Visit me on Wikipedia <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>! > > >-------------- next part -------------- >An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >URL: ><http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/attachments/20130424/dc717 >beb/attachment-0001.html> >-------------- next part -------------- >_______________________________________________ >Wmfcc-l mailing list >wmfc...@lists.wikimedia.org >https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wmfcc-l > >------------------------------ > >Message: 3 >Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:13:00 +0200 >From: María Sefidari <kewlshr...@yahoo.es> >To: Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects > <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org> >Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [PRESS] Women Novelists Wikipedia: Female > Authors Absent From Site's 'American Novelists' Page? >Message-ID: <2fcb679a-c6d9-4dfc-a9b9-be7793d59...@yahoo.es> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >The New York Times also has an article about this: > >http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism-toward- >female-novelists.html > >Kind regards, > >María > >Enviado desde mi dispositivo móvil > >El 25/04/2013, a las 01:21, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stie...@gmail.com> >escribió: > >> >> From The Huffington Post >> >> >>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/24/women-novelists-wikipedia-female >>-authors-american_n_3149345.html >> >> Attention female authors: you may be being segregated from your male >>peers on Wikipedia. On the online encyclopedia's "American Novelists" >>page, women authors are hard to find. Instead they have been filed >>primarily under "American Women Novelists." >> >> Vanity Fair contributing editor Elissa Schappell made this observation >>and posted on Facebook Wednesday: >> Women Writers take heed, you are being erased on Wikipedia. It would >>appear that in order to make room for male writers, women novelists >>(such as Amy Tan, Harper Lee, Donna Tartt and 300 others) have been >>moved off the "American Novelists" page and into the "American Women >>Novelists" category. Not the back of the bus, or the kiddie table >>exactly--except of course--when you google "American Novelists" the list >>that appears is almost exclusively men (3,387 men). The explanation on >>the pages is that the list of American Novelists is too long, therefore >>sub-categories are necessary. >> Idea: What about, "American Novelists with Penises" "American Novelists >>Who Are Vastly Over-Rated and Over-Paid" or "American Novelists Who >>Aren't Being Read But Should Be" (Here you'd find a lot of women, people >>of color...) >> Want to see where you're sitting for eternity? Take a peek. >> >> A disclaimer at the top of the American Novelists page reads, "This >>category may require frequent maintenance to avoid becoming too large. >>It should directly contain very few, if any, articles and should mainly >>contain subcategories." Schappell suggests that Wikipedia dealt with >>this space issue by moving the female authors off the page. >> >> The Huffington Post reached out to Wikipedia for a response to >>Schappell's claims but so far has not heard back. >> >> This is far from the first time that someone has expressed ire over the >>"second-class" treatment of female authors. VIDA, an organization >>dedicated to women in literary arts, pointed out that in 2011 the New >>York Times Book Review printed reviews of 520 male authors' books and >>only 273 books written by women. >> >> In a recent blog post on The Huffington Post, author Liza Palmer wrote >>about thedouble standard that exists in the literary world: >> All too often, when a woman writes a book about family and >>relationships the reader will sigh that she felt the narrator's inner >>monologues were "whiny" whereas when a male writer contemplates these >>same topics he is being "introspective." If a female writer uses humor >>in her dialogue she will be dismissed as "snarky", whereas if a male >>writer uses humor, he has a "biting wit." So called chick-lit writers >>get pinned with "predictable" endings, while male writers writing about >>the same topics have endings that are "satisfying." >> Perhaps it's time that Wikipedia realized that both men and women are >>great American novelists and should show up when you search for them. >> >> >> -- >> Sarah Stierch >> Wikimedia Foundation Program Evaluation Community Coordinator >> Donate today and keep it free! >> >> Visit me on Wikipedia! >> >> >> <Attached Message Part> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@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/20130425/34856 >8d6/attachment.html> > >------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Gendergap mailing list >Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > > >End of Gendergap Digest, Vol 27, Issue 18 >***************************************** _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
