[Gendergap] Reframing...Re: Wikimedia Conference (was - Diversity training forfunctionaries)
This point is so important I gave it its own subject line. Perhaps this language can be worked into the statement of purpose of all the WMF Gender gap projects... I also think Kerry should turn her whole excellent statement into an essay for the WMF site and it should be linked from GGTF main page. On 12/29/2014 4:07 PM, Kerry Raymond wrote: Does it matter? Believe me, a lot of people get really stuck at this point and frame it as “well, if women don’t want to edit Wikipedia, does it really matter? It’s their choice, isn’t it?” This is something that really needs to get reframed. Yes, of course, many women don’t Wikipedia because they simply aren’t interested in doing so (ditto many men). But there are barriers to entry and barriers to continued participation by women who are interested in doing so compared to men. Try to reframe it “are women equally able to edit Wikipedia” or “are there barriers to women editing?”. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Reframing...Re: Wikimedia Conference (was - Diversity training forfunctionaries)
Hmm. I stopped editing the Dutch Wikipedia because it just wasn't any fun anymore. I would never say I experienced barriers to entry or that there were barriers to continued participation. It is more that there was a continuous vacuum of silence that made participation feel like I was on an island all of the time. I was never invited to the discussion table on any specific subject, and if I stumbled across one, once there, my replies to statements were never answered directly, but indirectly in replies to others. I was never addressed personally and asked for an opinion. That doesn't happen regularly on Commons or the English Wikipedia either, but I feel much less on an island in bth of those projects and much more a part of a community. Any contribution I made to an ongoing discussion on the Dutch Wikipedia just stopped the discussion altogether or was simply ignored. I vaguely remember a few deletion discussions where my objections were brushed off with ridiculous arguments - so ridiculous that I wouldn't know what to reply in all seriousness. Of course I can't back this up with diffs and it is just a feeling, but it's because of the feeling that I stopped contributing. I guess I also got tired of always linking to redlinks in my area of interest - there are just more people working in my area of interest on the English Wikipedia, so that I feel I can lean more on the work of others. On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: This point is so important I gave it its own subject line. Perhaps this language can be worked into the statement of purpose of all the WMF Gender gap projects... I also think Kerry should turn her whole excellent statement into an essay for the WMF site and it should be linked from GGTF main page. On 12/29/2014 4:07 PM, Kerry Raymond wrote: Does it matter? Believe me, a lot of people get really stuck at this point and frame it as “well, if women don’t want to edit Wikipedia, does it really matter? It’s their choice, isn’t it?” This is something that really needs to get reframed. Yes, of course, many women don’t Wikipedia because they simply aren’t interested in doing so (ditto many men). But there are barriers to entry and barriers to continued participation by women who are interested in doing so compared to men. Try to reframe it “are women equally able to edit Wikipedia” or “are there barriers to women editing?”. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Reframing...Re: Wikimedia Conference (was - Diversity training forfunctionaries)
Good points, Jane Part of a hostile editing environment is the either they ignore you or they insult you phenomena. I'm sure a lot of women do quit for just the reason Jane describes - being ignored. I got that quoted phrase from a woman complaining about it in some mainstream article a few years ago. That made a lot of my experiences in email finally comprehensible. I found if I came up with a good idea, I was ignored. If I said something a bit outrageous in conjunction with that idea, some people might actually note the idea and comment on it, among all the outraged guys complaining about whatever (unladylike?) comment I made in conjunction with it. By the time I came to Wikipedia I was aware of that behavior and trying to find new strategies to get appropriate attention. Of course, on Wikipedia one doesn't have to go out of one's way to get attention if one regularly practices correcting editors, reverting them, seeking third opinions or going to noticeboards, any of which some editors also consider outrageous - particularly if the editor is perceived as being a women. Of course, if the editors in a specific culture - as where Jane was editing - choose to ignore women even when they are disagreeing with them or, in their eyes, acting outrageous, then that observation would not hold. CM On 12/30/2014 10:21 AM, Jane Darnell wrote: Hmm. I stopped editing the Dutch Wikipedia because it just wasn't any fun anymore. I would never say I experienced barriers to entry or that there were barriers to continued participation. It is more that there was a continuous vacuum of silence that made participation feel like I was on an island all of the time. I was never invited to the discussion table on any specific subject, and if I stumbled across one, once there, my replies to statements were never answered directly, but indirectly in replies to others. I was never addressed personally and asked for an opinion. That doesn't happen regularly on Commons or the English Wikipedia either, but I feel much less on an island in bth of those projects and much more a part of a community. Any contribution I made to an ongoing discussion on the Dutch Wikipedia just stopped the discussion altogether or was simply ignored. I vaguely remember a few deletion discussions where my objections were brushed off with ridiculous arguments - so ridiculous that I wouldn't know what to reply in all seriousness. Of course I can't back this up with diffs and it is just a feeling, but it's because of the feeling that I stopped contributing. I guess I also got tired of always linking to redlinks in my area of interest - there are just more people working in my area of interest on the English Wikipedia, so that I feel I can lean more on the work of others. On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net mailto:carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: This point is so important I gave it its own subject line. Perhaps this language can be worked into the statement of purpose of all the WMF Gender gap projects... I also think Kerry should turn her whole excellent statement into an essay for the WMF site and it should be linked from GGTF main page. On 12/29/2014 4:07 PM, Kerry Raymond wrote: Does it matter? Believe me, a lot of people get really stuck at this point and frame it as “well, if women don’t want to edit Wikipedia, does it really matter? It’s their choice, isn’t it?” This is something that really needs to get reframed. Yes, of course, many women don’t Wikipedia because they simply aren’t interested in doing so (ditto many men). But there are barriers to entry and barriers to continued participation by women who are interested in doing so compared to men. Try to reframe it “are women equally able to edit Wikipedia” or “are there barriers to women editing?”. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
Re: [Gendergap] Reframing...Re: Wikimedia Conference (was - Diversity training forfunctionaries)
I do call the Dutch Wikipedia a hostile editing environment, but I am not convinced that environment is more hostile to women than to men. It is decidedly hostile to all newcomers and all outsiders, where I would consider outsiders to be people who make edits less often than once per month. I never thought about whether women get the silent treatment more than men, butif they do, this could just be a byproduct of women having an innate interest in things more appealing to women than to men, and with a female editor population of 6%, someone with those interests is more likely to get the silent treatment just because of female editor scarcity. That said, it is also quite possible that the silent treatment is some sort of symptom of discrimination, though I would need to see some numbers to be convinced of it. On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: Good points, Jane Part of a hostile editing environment is the either they ignore you or they insult you phenomena. I'm sure a lot of women do quit for just the reason Jane describes - being ignored. I got that quoted phrase from a woman complaining about it in some mainstream article a few years ago. That made a lot of my experiences in email finally comprehensible. I found if I came up with a good idea, I was ignored. If I said something a bit outrageous in conjunction with that idea, some people might actually note the idea and comment on it, among all the outraged guys complaining about whatever (unladylike?) comment I made in conjunction with it. By the time I came to Wikipedia I was aware of that behavior and trying to find new strategies to get appropriate attention. Of course, on Wikipedia one doesn't have to go out of one's way to get attention if one regularly practices correcting editors, reverting them, seeking third opinions or going to noticeboards, any of which some editors also consider outrageous - particularly if the editor is perceived as being a women. Of course, if the editors in a specific culture - as where Jane was editing - choose to ignore women even when they are disagreeing with them or, in their eyes, acting outrageous, then that observation would not hold. CM On 12/30/2014 10:21 AM, Jane Darnell wrote: Hmm. I stopped editing the Dutch Wikipedia because it just wasn't any fun anymore. I would never say I experienced barriers to entry or that there were barriers to continued participation. It is more that there was a continuous vacuum of silence that made participation feel like I was on an island all of the time. I was never invited to the discussion table on any specific subject, and if I stumbled across one, once there, my replies to statements were never answered directly, but indirectly in replies to others. I was never addressed personally and asked for an opinion. That doesn't happen regularly on Commons or the English Wikipedia either, but I feel much less on an island in bth of those projects and much more a part of a community. Any contribution I made to an ongoing discussion on the Dutch Wikipedia just stopped the discussion altogether or was simply ignored. I vaguely remember a few deletion discussions where my objections were brushed off with ridiculous arguments - so ridiculous that I wouldn't know what to reply in all seriousness. Of course I can't back this up with diffs and it is just a feeling, but it's because of the feeling that I stopped contributing. I guess I also got tired of always linking to redlinks in my area of interest - there are just more people working in my area of interest on the English Wikipedia, so that I feel I can lean more on the work of others. On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: This point is so important I gave it its own subject line. Perhaps this language can be worked into the statement of purpose of all the WMF Gender gap projects... I also think Kerry should turn her whole excellent statement into an essay for the WMF site and it should be linked from GGTF main page. On 12/29/2014 4:07 PM, Kerry Raymond wrote: Does it matter? Believe me, a lot of people get really stuck at this point and frame it as “well, if women don’t want to edit Wikipedia, does it really matter? It’s their choice, isn’t it?” This is something that really needs to get reframed. Yes, of course, many women don’t Wikipedia because they simply aren’t interested in doing so (ditto many men). But there are barriers to entry and barriers to continued participation by women who are interested in doing so compared to men. Try to reframe it “are women equally able to edit Wikipedia” or “are there barriers to women editing?”. ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
Re: [Gendergap] Reframing...Re: Wikimedia Conference (was - Diversity training forfunctionaries)
Sorry to read that, Sarah. But maybe you just need a new project! I must admit I make way more edits on Wikidata than anywhere else these days - I believe that is where I can make the most effective contribution. I can't resist writing articles on Wikipedia now and then though. On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah..I don't edit as much as I used to on Wikipedia now. I am obsessed with Wikidata and doing more work in Commons again (shocker). :) It's been a while since i've even written an article. But, i do edit each day, just little things, not as prolific as I once was. I'd gladly do it if I was a Wikipedian in Residence again, I like having missions...and I'm burnt out on writing about women on Wikipedia. And most of the major projects I've started or been involved in have been completed to the point where I'm no longer interested. It just wears me out. I feel like every place I step on Wikipedia could lead to me getting harassed or called out on something or whatever..it's like walking on egg shells. This coming from a person who helped lead the fight in creating 'nice' culture on Wikipedia. People just can't let things go, and it just thwarts the energy and passion I have towards editing myself. But, i've had the pleasure of helping women around the world learn how to edit, so I guess that whole idea of cloning myself sort of worked :) -Sarah -Sarah On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: Good points, Jane Part of a hostile editing environment is the either they ignore you or they insult you phenomena. I'm sure a lot of women do quit for just the reason Jane describes - being ignored. I got that quoted phrase from a woman complaining about it in some mainstream article a few years ago. That made a lot of my experiences in email finally comprehensible. I found if I came up with a good idea, I was ignored. If I said something a bit outrageous in conjunction with that idea, some people might actually note the idea and comment on it, among all the outraged guys complaining about whatever (unladylike?) comment I made in conjunction with it. By the time I came to Wikipedia I was aware of that behavior and trying to find new strategies to get appropriate attention. Of course, on Wikipedia one doesn't have to go out of one's way to get attention if one regularly practices correcting editors, reverting them, seeking third opinions or going to noticeboards, any of which some editors also consider outrageous - particularly if the editor is perceived as being a women. Of course, if the editors in a specific culture - as where Jane was editing - choose to ignore women even when they are disagreeing with them or, in their eyes, acting outrageous, then that observation would not hold. CM On 12/30/2014 10:21 AM, Jane Darnell wrote: Hmm. I stopped editing the Dutch Wikipedia because it just wasn't any fun anymore. I would never say I experienced barriers to entry or that there were barriers to continued participation. It is more that there was a continuous vacuum of silence that made participation feel like I was on an island all of the time. I was never invited to the discussion table on any specific subject, and if I stumbled across one, once there, my replies to statements were never answered directly, but indirectly in replies to others. I was never addressed personally and asked for an opinion. That doesn't happen regularly on Commons or the English Wikipedia either, but I feel much less on an island in bth of those projects and much more a part of a community. Any contribution I made to an ongoing discussion on the Dutch Wikipedia just stopped the discussion altogether or was simply ignored. I vaguely remember a few deletion discussions where my objections were brushed off with ridiculous arguments - so ridiculous that I wouldn't know what to reply in all seriousness. Of course I can't back this up with diffs and it is just a feeling, but it's because of the feeling that I stopped contributing. I guess I also got tired of always linking to redlinks in my area of interest - there are just more people working in my area of interest on the English Wikipedia, so that I feel I can lean more on the work of others. On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: This point is so important I gave it its own subject line. Perhaps this language can be worked into the statement of purpose of all the WMF Gender gap projects... I also think Kerry should turn her whole excellent statement into an essay for the WMF site and it should be linked from GGTF main page. On 12/29/2014 4:07 PM, Kerry Raymond wrote: Does it matter? Believe me, a lot of people get really stuck at this point and frame it as “well, if women don’t want to edit Wikipedia, does it really matter? It’s their choice, isn’t it?” This is
Re: [Gendergap] Reframing...Re: Wikimedia Conference (was - Diversity training forfunctionaries)
Wikidata is the bommbbb!! :) On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry to read that, Sarah. But maybe you just need a new project! I must admit I make way more edits on Wikidata than anywhere else these days - I believe that is where I can make the most effective contribution. I can't resist writing articles on Wikipedia now and then though. On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah..I don't edit as much as I used to on Wikipedia now. I am obsessed with Wikidata and doing more work in Commons again (shocker). :) It's been a while since i've even written an article. But, i do edit each day, just little things, not as prolific as I once was. I'd gladly do it if I was a Wikipedian in Residence again, I like having missions...and I'm burnt out on writing about women on Wikipedia. And most of the major projects I've started or been involved in have been completed to the point where I'm no longer interested. It just wears me out. I feel like every place I step on Wikipedia could lead to me getting harassed or called out on something or whatever..it's like walking on egg shells. This coming from a person who helped lead the fight in creating 'nice' culture on Wikipedia. People just can't let things go, and it just thwarts the energy and passion I have towards editing myself. But, i've had the pleasure of helping women around the world learn how to edit, so I guess that whole idea of cloning myself sort of worked :) -Sarah -Sarah On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: Good points, Jane Part of a hostile editing environment is the either they ignore you or they insult you phenomena. I'm sure a lot of women do quit for just the reason Jane describes - being ignored. I got that quoted phrase from a woman complaining about it in some mainstream article a few years ago. That made a lot of my experiences in email finally comprehensible. I found if I came up with a good idea, I was ignored. If I said something a bit outrageous in conjunction with that idea, some people might actually note the idea and comment on it, among all the outraged guys complaining about whatever (unladylike?) comment I made in conjunction with it. By the time I came to Wikipedia I was aware of that behavior and trying to find new strategies to get appropriate attention. Of course, on Wikipedia one doesn't have to go out of one's way to get attention if one regularly practices correcting editors, reverting them, seeking third opinions or going to noticeboards, any of which some editors also consider outrageous - particularly if the editor is perceived as being a women. Of course, if the editors in a specific culture - as where Jane was editing - choose to ignore women even when they are disagreeing with them or, in their eyes, acting outrageous, then that observation would not hold. CM On 12/30/2014 10:21 AM, Jane Darnell wrote: Hmm. I stopped editing the Dutch Wikipedia because it just wasn't any fun anymore. I would never say I experienced barriers to entry or that there were barriers to continued participation. It is more that there was a continuous vacuum of silence that made participation feel like I was on an island all of the time. I was never invited to the discussion table on any specific subject, and if I stumbled across one, once there, my replies to statements were never answered directly, but indirectly in replies to others. I was never addressed personally and asked for an opinion. That doesn't happen regularly on Commons or the English Wikipedia either, but I feel much less on an island in bth of those projects and much more a part of a community. Any contribution I made to an ongoing discussion on the Dutch Wikipedia just stopped the discussion altogether or was simply ignored. I vaguely remember a few deletion discussions where my objections were brushed off with ridiculous arguments - so ridiculous that I wouldn't know what to reply in all seriousness. Of course I can't back this up with diffs and it is just a feeling, but it's because of the feeling that I stopped contributing. I guess I also got tired of always linking to redlinks in my area of interest - there are just more people working in my area of interest on the English Wikipedia, so that I feel I can lean more on the work of others. On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: This point is so important I gave it its own subject line. Perhaps this language can be worked into the statement of purpose of all the WMF Gender gap projects... I also think Kerry should turn her whole excellent statement into an essay for the WMF site and it should be linked from GGTF main page. On 12/29/2014 4:07 PM, Kerry Raymond wrote: Does it matter? Believe me, a lot of people get really stuck at this point and frame it as
Re: [Gendergap] Reframing...Re: Wikimedia Conference (was - Diversity training forfunctionaries)
totally! On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: Wikidata is the bommbbb!! :) On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry to read that, Sarah. But maybe you just need a new project! I must admit I make way more edits on Wikidata than anywhere else these days - I believe that is where I can make the most effective contribution. I can't resist writing articles on Wikipedia now and then though. On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah..I don't edit as much as I used to on Wikipedia now. I am obsessed with Wikidata and doing more work in Commons again (shocker). :) It's been a while since i've even written an article. But, i do edit each day, just little things, not as prolific as I once was. I'd gladly do it if I was a Wikipedian in Residence again, I like having missions...and I'm burnt out on writing about women on Wikipedia. And most of the major projects I've started or been involved in have been completed to the point where I'm no longer interested. It just wears me out. I feel like every place I step on Wikipedia could lead to me getting harassed or called out on something or whatever..it's like walking on egg shells. This coming from a person who helped lead the fight in creating 'nice' culture on Wikipedia. People just can't let things go, and it just thwarts the energy and passion I have towards editing myself. But, i've had the pleasure of helping women around the world learn how to edit, so I guess that whole idea of cloning myself sort of worked :) -Sarah -Sarah On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: Good points, Jane Part of a hostile editing environment is the either they ignore you or they insult you phenomena. I'm sure a lot of women do quit for just the reason Jane describes - being ignored. I got that quoted phrase from a woman complaining about it in some mainstream article a few years ago. That made a lot of my experiences in email finally comprehensible. I found if I came up with a good idea, I was ignored. If I said something a bit outrageous in conjunction with that idea, some people might actually note the idea and comment on it, among all the outraged guys complaining about whatever (unladylike?) comment I made in conjunction with it. By the time I came to Wikipedia I was aware of that behavior and trying to find new strategies to get appropriate attention. Of course, on Wikipedia one doesn't have to go out of one's way to get attention if one regularly practices correcting editors, reverting them, seeking third opinions or going to noticeboards, any of which some editors also consider outrageous - particularly if the editor is perceived as being a women. Of course, if the editors in a specific culture - as where Jane was editing - choose to ignore women even when they are disagreeing with them or, in their eyes, acting outrageous, then that observation would not hold. CM On 12/30/2014 10:21 AM, Jane Darnell wrote: Hmm. I stopped editing the Dutch Wikipedia because it just wasn't any fun anymore. I would never say I experienced barriers to entry or that there were barriers to continued participation. It is more that there was a continuous vacuum of silence that made participation feel like I was on an island all of the time. I was never invited to the discussion table on any specific subject, and if I stumbled across one, once there, my replies to statements were never answered directly, but indirectly in replies to others. I was never addressed personally and asked for an opinion. That doesn't happen regularly on Commons or the English Wikipedia either, but I feel much less on an island in bth of those projects and much more a part of a community. Any contribution I made to an ongoing discussion on the Dutch Wikipedia just stopped the discussion altogether or was simply ignored. I vaguely remember a few deletion discussions where my objections were brushed off with ridiculous arguments - so ridiculous that I wouldn't know what to reply in all seriousness. Of course I can't back this up with diffs and it is just a feeling, but it's because of the feeling that I stopped contributing. I guess I also got tired of always linking to redlinks in my area of interest - there are just more people working in my area of interest on the English Wikipedia, so that I feel I can lean more on the work of others. On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Carol Moore dc carolmoor...@verizon.net wrote: This point is so important I gave it its own subject line. Perhaps this language can be worked into the statement of purpose of all the WMF Gender gap projects... I also think Kerry should turn her whole excellent statement into an essay for the WMF site and it should be linked from GGTF main page. On 12/29/2014 4:07 PM, Kerry Raymond wrote:
