Thursday, January 15, 2015

Separate but totally equal

It's always amusing to see equalitarians implicitly admit they can't compete on an equal playing field or even abide neutral standards:
What is the problem you're trying to solve?

There is currently no space on Wikipedia where a woman can go and be sure that she'll be able to participate in discussions without being dominated by men's voices. Wikipedia needs a place where women can feel safer and not always overwhelmed by male advice, criticism, and explanations.

What is your solution?

Using the user preferences "Internationalisation" setting for those who prefer to be described as "she" (or the "Female Wikipedians" category), plus a project-moderator process where editors pledge that they are women and have read and agreed to the project's rules, registered women editors may join the project and discuss Wikipedia related matters. It would probably be more focused on community, policies, and guidelines than on content, but content discussion would not be off limits.

Women editors would not be required to join the project, of course, and all editors, regardless of gender, would be able to read the project's pages. The project is not meant to replace any existing project. The project will not be against the WMF Non discrimination policy because it will not prohibit any editor from contributing to any Wikimedia project.

The pledge process would be similar to the subscription process that the Anita Borg Institute "Systers" forum has been using successfully for over 20 years.
  •     Create a space conducive to women's participation on Wikipedia. (No trashing allowed.)
  •     Maintain the space for women to seek advice from women peers.
  •     Maintain the space for women to discuss the challenges they share as women Wikipedians.
  •     Increase the number of women editors on Wikipedia.
Translation: if you're going to be permitted to criticize anyone, the women are going to run away.

28 comments:

Robert What? said...

Personally I never use Wikipedia for anything other than the most mundane, noncontroversial, fact-based lookups, like how far Mars is from the Sun and how to compute the volume of a sphere. Since Wikipedia has become highly politicized, it is unreliable for anything else.

Brad Andrews said...

It has some reasonably good technical information. It can be good to find basic information, but you have to watch for the bias the farther you stray.

swiftfoxmark2 said...

Why don't they go cry themselves to sleep while eating a gallon of ice cream?

Lousy whiners.

Doom said...

"It would probably be more focused on community, policies, and guidelines than on content, but content discussion would not be off limits." So... not even content based? Yum. Like they need another Oprah forum. Beside, it sounds like they already have one, with the systerhood. Oh, they will probably get it. The small dicks who run these things run and hide every time a woman bleeds at them.

As to eliminating competition, first they come for the men, then they go after the two smart women. I understand their need to have unfettered space. Any fettering and they rage quit, mostly quietly save for the broads. A feature not a bug, by the way. And I understand their want to have a voice. But that they need a private place to have a voice pretty much cancels... well... having a voice. Mentally masturbatory and just as fruitful. Thankfully, for them, the men they deal with have no balls. Hmm... which makes me wonder why they need a private place? Can't even handle the mentally castrated among men? Wow.

Earl Thomas said...

Women...'we want leadership!'

Ok but you'll have to be accountable and answer to criticism.

Women...'we want safe places where our leadership will be affirmed'.

pancakeloach said...

"she'll be able to participate in discussions without being dominated by men's voices"

Translation:
Problem: men are talking. How dare they talk in the presence of a woman instead of listening silently at her feet?
Solution: shut them up.

Yeah, I don't have a lot of respect for grrrrls like these. How delicate must you be if "men's voices" can dominate you through TEXT on a SCREEN?

There does appear to be a pretty good black-knighting angle on this, though. Just sayin'.

Patrick Kelly said...

"Create a space conducive to women's participation on Wikipedia. (No trashing allowed.)"

And it's going to be populated by women? HAHAHAHAHAHHA...........it'll be a big bitchy cat fight.......

Owen said...

This is clearly only for white women and will be a colossal flop if it gets the green light.

I wholeheartedly support it.

How many times do women say they'd rather work in male only or male run workplaces before they get the collective hint that female-run places implode? Cliques, grudges, harassment.

Let it happen. Send in a Black Knight to simply copy/paste the coming cacophony of shrieking. Gotta have something to laugh about when this is all over.

Owen said...

Yeah, I don't have a lot of respect for grrrrls like these. How delicate must you be if "men's voices" can dominate you through TEXT on a SCREEN?

Men do "fisking" far better and naturally. It destroys the momentum of rants.

Tommy Hass said...

"Hmm... which makes me wonder why they need a private place? Can't even handle the mentally castrated among men? Wow."

THAT is the worst of it. Wikpedos are some of the most pussified "males" you will ever meet. And even THEY cause premature menstruation with these pussies.

Yohami said...

"if you're going to be permitted to criticize anyone"

Except the women will use that space to criticize everyone. What they want is moderator power to install echo chambers. Then it will be safe for every complying woman.

stonesphinxes said...

Apparently we're too fragile to stand up to that awful criticism from men. Strong, intelligent, dignified, and requiring of our own bubble-wrapped womb to hide in where we're free from "trashing," which I generally take to mean "any disagreement whatsoever" in this context. Shameful.

My solution - Eliminate gender markers from Wikipedia editors altogether. Everyone stands on the strength of their work alone.

Owen said...

My solution - Eliminate gender markers from Wikipedia editors altogether. Everyone stands on the strength of their work alone.

The internet already does that, in a way. Guys pretend to be girls and visa versa. And they're typically sniffed out within a couple posts.

Easiest way to find a guy who is posting as a woman? If he does point for point takedowns. Woman posing as man? Emotional appeals and solipsism.

Joseph Dooley said...

Gender binary much?

Tom Terrific said...

What category is this posted in? "Women Ruin Everything"?

This is solipsism on display for all to see. "Your logical, rational, articulate, yet also passionate entry or comments demonstrate you must be a man. Yet your conclusion MAKES ME feel bad, therefore your postings must be either deleted or you must be forbidden to ever post again. Only then can I FEEEEEEL safe. And as males, you wiki editors, you have an obligation to MAKE ME feeeeeeeel safe."

"Sticks and stones may break my bones but words can break my heart." Written by a wonderful songwriter and singer, but definitely a woman.

Conscientia Republicae said...

The hate keeps me warm.

1sexistpig2another said...

Translation: if you're going to be permitted to criticize anyone, the women are going to run away.

So let it be written. So let it be done.

cailcorishev said...

1. Carve out an internal safe space for women. Most women go there.
2. Complain that women have been excluded from the other spaces (they weren't, they left voluntarily to form their own).
3. Require the other spaces to de-masculinize to make women "welcome" there.
4. Men leave for less effeminate realms, leaving behind only women and gamma males.
5. End up with a Facebook style site which only allows "likes," no criticism or disagreement.

Since we already know how it's going to go, can't we just skip to the end where Wikipedia is run by women and a few emasculated gammas and no one uses it anymore?

papabear said...

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/opinion/sunday/speaking-while-female.html

Black Poison Soul said...

Translation: "Stupid entitled cunts want to invade and take over another male-dominated space with male blessing waaaaaahhhhh!!!"

Solution: Tell 'em to suck it up and go create Womanpedia - by and for women exclusively, no males allowed whatsoever.

Not that any male would want to go near such an estrogen-filled hole.

dalrock said...

Create a space conducive to women's participation on Wikipedia. (No trashing allowed.)

I can see it now:

That is a really great article Sally! I wish I could research and write like that, but unfortunately I'm too busy with my husband and children. It is soooo great that you have the free time to prove that women can do this too!

Jack Amok said...

There is currently no space on Wikipedia where a woman can go and be sure that she'll be able to participate in discussions without being dominated by men's voices.

Absurd. Are there not Wikipedia pages for Twilight, Prada and Sex and the City?

Markku said...

Remember, if you feel genderflud today, you can pledge to be female, whatever your plumbing. If someone complains, that makes you a victim of discrimination to boot.

Ron said...

@Conscientia Republicae

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQyhmd7Gk4U

I love his happy smile when he says it.

Ron said...

@Tommy Haas

Wikpedos are some of the most pussified "males" you will ever meet. And even THEY cause premature menstruation with these pussies.

You should switch the word "even" with the word "especially". I have begun to learn that women hate weak men with the same raging fury and contempt that starving men have for a wealthy man that is too timid to take care of himself.

aeolipera said...

content discussion would not be off limits.

Emphasis mine.

Akulkis said...

@Doom

Would you stop saying, "yum" ??
It makes you come off like a 14-year old slut working on her 3rd abortion.

Pussy-ManiaGirls: http://goo.gl/w9Oepq said...

watching my collection, we have upload more video at here:

Collection Part 1:

Doggy Style and In Missionary Position

Hot Sex Anal With Amazing Girl Friend

Sex Under Hot Lights Bad Girls

Give Me The Cum

Cum In My Panties

Nude Amateur Teen Girls

Sexy Brunette Girls

Young Kinky Sluts

Busty Tattoo Chick On Car

Young Asian fucked anal

Latina Havana Ginger gets

Teen Threesome Porn

Hot Blowjob

Amateur Pulls Down Tanga

Sweet girl amazing hot

Sexy japanese babes getting their tight

TEEN BLONDE ANAL SEX ORGY




Collection Part 2:


Hot asian blowjob and pussy creampie

Sucking dick, Audrey put vegetables in all holes

Blonde love fuck

Naomi Russell And Her Royal Ass

Sexy blonde gives blowjob in the car

ASIAN XXX PORN VIDEO

JAPANESE XXX PORN VIDEO

ARABIC XXX PORN VIDEO

HARDCORE PORN VIDEO

GAY XXX PORN VIDEO

WATCH STREAMING PORN VIDEO

USA CELEBS XXX PORN

LATINA XXX PORN

LESBIAN XXX PORN

Hardcore Porn Celebrity

HOT TURKEY PORN MOVIE

INDIAN NUDES CELEBRITIES VIDEOS

UZBEKS Fuck PORN VIDEOS

HOT RASTA GIRL


100% MAKE you satisfy......








































Reply Delete

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.