I think sometimes about the e.e. cummings quote "To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight; and never stop fighting" (citation needed) - that it also means that to support others in being themselves is ALSO one of the hardest battles we fight. I hear the exhaustion, the need to have a place to put forward ideas, where one will experience support and not combat, and just want to say that I'm proud of the extraordinary effort to date. As throw-things-at-the-wall angry as the human rights fighting makes me, in all the places we fight injustice, knowing there are allies out there willing to wade into the shitstorms of things does help keep the flame a little kindled for me.
So to Carol and Helga, specifically, this is not a shout down, but a shout out of "Thank you", for the courage to speak, for the resilience, and I'm sending my wishes for a respite, a good night's sleep, a hearty meal, a conversation with a friend, or whatever you may want or need to keep going. On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Sue Gardner <[email protected]>wrote: > One thing I find interesting about the discussions on this is that people > seem to be, sometimes, applying different standards from how we normally > handle ourselves. So on WP normally, there is some deference paid to > expertise (as distinct from credentials). Normally, editors will often > defer to others who are known to have subject-matter expertise in a > particular area. We express expertise through research: editors who have > done a lot of reading and who cite reliable sources have more weight > accorded to their views than those who have not done that reading and > citing. > > It feels to me like on this issue people are often seeming to substitute > "common sense" or "conventional wisdom" for expertise/knowledge. There has > been lots of scholarly work on transgender issues, in the fields of > psychology, gender studies, medicine, and so forth. So it surprises me to > have editors making off-the-cuff comments, and expecting them to be taken > seriously. A lot of people's expressed assumptions (that Chelsea may change > her mind tomorrow, that Chelsea was a man and is now a woman, or even that > a person's gender is easy to determine) are just flat-out wrong. It's okay > for people to be wrong, but their wrong assumptions shouldn't determine > what goes in an encyclopedia. > > (In saying this, I'm not responding directly to Helga or Carol. It's just > something I've noticed on the enWP discussions that I think is interesting.) > > Thanks, > Sue > On Aug 24, 2013 6:18 AM, "Carol Moore dc" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> There have been similar problems at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/** >> Chelsea_Manning <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Manning> >> Obviously there have been a number of comments that are obviously >> transphobic. However, there also have been repeated false charges of >> transphobia against those who cite good policy reasons for not changing the >> name. I personally oppose the change to Chelsea as premature for a number >> of reasons, FYI. >> >> And there are good reasons to question what happened at that article >> process wise (the policy reasons for and against the change are discussed >> ad nauseam at the talk page where editors are just trying to get it changed >> back to Bradley Manning, though I think that's morphed into a final >> discussion - hard to tell!! ): >> * an admin changed the title to Chelsea Manning with no discussion on the >> talk page, given it's a controversial move in such a high publicity figure >> *the admin then spoke to the press about it, wrote a blog entry with >> their opinion, tweeted about it, and got even more media publicity for >> their blog entry and/or tweets >> *I would not be surprised if a number of editors also alerted the media >> to her writings and actions in order to try to influence the outcome of a >> Wikipedia policy decision >> *I don't know how much off wiki canvassing there was, but I did start a >> list of wikiprojects alerted, so at least that aspect of WP:Canvass would >> be covered >> *an editor threatened anyone moving the title back would become a minor >> celebrity for a few days, a threat only to those whose actual names were >> used, which implied outing (there's a subsection of the larger ANI thread >> on that threat and related insults) >> >> Wonder if I'll get shouted down *here* yet again for expressing my >> opinions... sigh... >> >> CM >> >> >> >> On 8/24/2013 7:34 AM, Helga Hansen wrote: >> >>> In the German Wikipedia a huge discussion has erupted over the question >>> how to change the Wikipedia page for Chelsea Manning and it's another >>> textbook example over how to drive women of Wikipedia. You can see the gory >>> details here (in German of course): http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/** >>> Diskussion:Bradley_Manning<http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Bradley_Manning> >>> >>> I don't want to discuss this because it has already exhausted me to no >>> end but it's another example of “How not to deal with women” and especially >>> “How not to deal with transwomen” and it's important to understand the >>> dynamics. >>> >>> After her statement on Today, one user went over the article, changing >>> it from Bradley to Chelsea. When discussions about this started, two other >>> users set up a section "Namensänderung" that addressed some of the >>> criticism (confusion over names, before „Breanna“ was mentioned, how the >>> support network has handled the name question) and provided sources. They >>> did this on an etherpad and then moved the complete section into Wikipedia. >>> By the way a modus operandi that I have heard from several women, to >>> minimize chances of their work being deleted again. >>> One admin locked the article title to Chelsea Manning. Some friends told >>> me how happy they were to see the page presenting her in this way. >>> >>> Over the night, though, the discussion exploded. Changes were made by >>> the minute, or rather, the article was reverted. Every try, to change >>> something back or to reason with people was made impossible. To keep up, >>> you would have had to be there, writing and fighting not only during the >>> day but also the night. That is just not possible for anybody except >>> students. >>> >>> Somebody mentioned that “commonly referred to names” were ok to use, so >>> I tried to get people to acknowledge that the final article will influence >>> how Manning is referred to in German speaking countries. No avail. Instead, >>> the amount of transphobic statements was disgusting. People wanting to >>> check her therapy progress, ID documents or in her pants. I cannot blame >>> anybody who doesn't want to deal with this sort of violence. >>> >>> Every try to get people consider US laws and customs, which differ from >>> much stricter German transgender laws and guidelines, was totally ignored. >>> Also, guidelines by transgender organizations on how to write about >>> transpeople were ignored. Somebody brought up the fact that Manning hat >>> entered the military in a profession reserved for men at the time. Instead >>> of asking an expert how to deal with it, it was solely used as an argument. >>> It was all just opinions, instead of facts. While some people were still >>> talking about knowledge, someone else would start a vote and then the >>> majority decided. >>> (In case you wonder: one way would be to keep referring to Chelsea as >>> female while noting that the profession was reserved for men at the time >>> and she entered presenting as male.) >>> >>> Of course, people who identified as women or worse, transwomen, were >>> shouted down to no end and accused of being too emotional or having a >>> political agenda. Wanting to be treated with respect and having human >>> rights is indeed a political agenda but none to be insulted for. Also: one >>> transwoman was not egligible to vote, her account was too “new”. She had >>> shut down her old account, from before transition for several reason >>> (transphobia being one). >>> >>> The section "Namensänderung" was removed, too. There was no reason given >>> and Kathrin, the author, later told in a podcast how difficult it was for >>> her to find out, how and when this happened as it was removed with other >>> sections. She managed to get it restored with the help of an experienced >>> Wikipedia admin. Deleting a thoroughly researched section that is >>> undoubtedly relevant reeks of erasure, in this case of the existence of a >>> transwoman. The podcast (in German) is available here: >>> http://www.iheartdigitallife.**de/nrrrdz000020-mesh-up/<http://www.iheartdigitallife.de/nrrrdz000020-mesh-up/> >>> >>> So. There's a group of mostly women, who poured their hearts into work, >>> defended it thoroughly and were insulted and shouted down. I honestly see >>> no way, how we are even in a position to get people to change guidelines >>> anywhere in Wikipedia. Plus, we're all exhausted. >>> >>> Still, there are some ideas what to do: >>> - The guidelines on naming need to include how to deal with transpersons. >>> - As does a policy of using pronouns. >>> - If guidelines and policies are expanded on how to deal with >>> marginalised groups, their expertise has to be valued. >>> - Removal of sections should be easier to reconstruct >>> >>> Once again: I don't want to discuss the issue at hand or even be forced >>> to defend who wrote what when. I also know how Wikipedia works and this >>> mailinglist is in no place to officially demand changes, yadayada. But this >>> is important. If it weren't for some very persistent people, the German >>> entry would not even mention the fact that Manning has asked to be referred >>> to as a woman. >>> >>> All the best >>> Helga Hansen >>> >>> >>> PS: It has to be said that Lana Wachowskis entry was changed without >>> much kerfuffle, but then it's always been a “Wachowski brothers” entry >>> that's now “Wachowski siblings” and there's about one pronoun used that >>> refers to “her” and not “them”. >>> >>> PPS: Please realize that I feel the need to ask not be treated to any >>> explanations because I have experienced that way too often. >>> >>> __________________ >>> Helga Hansen >>> @hanhaiwen >>> helgahansen.de >>> >>> ______________________________**_________________ >>> Gendergap mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/gendergap<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap> >>> >> >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/gendergap<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > > -- Gayle Karen K. Young Chief Talent and Culture Officer Wikimedia Foundation 415.310.8416 www.wikimediafoundation.org
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
