Wikipedia, women, feminism

1. Wikipedia, women, feminism - background info -

2. Wikipedia & feminist concerns • adding historical and contemporary famous women held to more exigent criteria than male entries=>less present • “women’s” issues (also “social impacts”/”domestic” objects, issues) marginalized/entries lacking • women editors’ voices silenced/leadership/tech as “masculine”, male-dominated field • Ex.: • “man” & “woman” entries(critique of “vulgar terms” section, change) • Wikipedia-> Talk:Women's rights • danah boyd entry • Shelly Powers: “Ladies, Wikipedia is Ours” • “Systemic bias wrt gender” discussion on wikiEN-l

3. WikiChix • History • Creation as Wikipedia wiki • Move off Wikimedia Offlist chat about the recent discussions on systemic gender bias in Wikipedia made it clear that a number of women were not comfortable contributing to the conversation there. This inspired the creation of WikiChix in November 2006. WikiChix is a wiki and mailing list for female wiki editors to discuss issues of gender bias in wikis, to promote wikis to potential female editors, and for general discussion of wikis in a friendly female-only environment.

4. WikiChix reactions/”controversy” • issues with women only comparison w/ LinuxChix, Ubuntu Women, Debian Women, KDE Women… • Alternet article “Wikipedia vs. women” and ensuing comments and outrage (@ women “creating a Women’s Wikipedia”?) In addition to decision-making and legal necessity motivating closed subgroups within open communities, minority groups troubled by perceived bias in the larger community sometimes also seek a separate “safer” space. The creation of such a space, the female only WikiChix mailing list, broke from the model of female friendly, but non-exclusive, spaces in other open content communities and prompted arguments that such moves could become absurd, are unnecessarily divisive, and contrary to the egalitarian ethos of the larger community. This led to WikiChix being detached from any support or formal affiliation with Wikipedia. I conclude by arguing this break from open but focus-friendly subgroups should only be a last resort and we should better understand the circumstances that necessitate it. -“Equality, gender, and speech in open communities”|Re-public: re-imagining democracy “It has led to a lot of extra subscriptions to the mailing list. I'm contacting the people who applied to confirm they are female. There are now 66 subscribers and 13 more that I'm waiting to hear back from.” (Angela)

5. more history/controversy Not surprisingly, it did not take long for the WikiChix proposal to be challenged; a longtime male contributor and self-described “overly combative” “anarchist” tried to subscribe to the list and was rejected. (I suppose this action was a violation of the norm Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point, which brings some measure of sanity to difficult issues.) In my informal observation of similar communities I haven’t perceived a decrease in female presence after the provisioning of a female friendly space. A counter to the hypothesis that women are abandoning the common space is that having a more supportive space to fall back upon will encourage comfort in speaking in common spaces. The final, parliamentary, objection to the WikiChix proposal was that this exclusive list was being hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation. The other free software related women fora, while focused on being “women-friendly,” are more or less open and affiliated with the larger community. LinuxChix is “intended to be an inclusive group where everyone is and feels welcome. LinuxChix is intended to be primarily for women. The name is an accurate reflection of that fact. Men are welcome because we do not want this group to be exclusive.” Debian Women states: “We’re not segregated. Debian Women is a subgroup of Debian that allows anyone to join and help.” On UbuntuWomen, “Membership is open to all.” The KDE Women website is run by women so “you have to be a woman,” but in addition to the six listed female members, there are also five male “supporters” and men are present on the IRC channel and mailing list. The gender exclusivity of WikiChix is atypical and it is not clear to what extent this decision was considered, purposeful, and what the consequences might be relative to the other female friendly fora. In the end, the WikiChix list was moved from being hosted by Wikimedia, which might carry the presumption of endorsing exclusive discrimination, to a non-Wikipedia host: “Excellent. I still think it’s a bad idea, but if it’s not being supported in any way by Wikimedia Foundation there’s no need to complain about it here any more.” As is often the case on difficult issues, the conclusion to this argument was facilitated as much by exhaustion as by reason. Endless argument about whether bias exists, rather than partaking in constructive dialogue on how to counter it, is a reason such spaces are often created! By severing any support and official affiliation with the Wikimedia Foundation the topic became moot to the larger community.

6. WikiChix FAQ • Section 1: for people who accept this exists • How did WikiChix come about? • A thread on wikiEN-l began in November 2006 called Systemic bias wrt gender initially concerning the English Wikipedia coverage of topics that could be considered stereotypically "female", and how low participation by female editors could be contributing to that. It soon expanded to a discussion of how comfortable women felt contributing to the existing channels. Thus, with an eye to successful existing groups such as LinuxChix, WikiChix was born. • How can I get started being a Wikipedia editor? • The best way to start at Wikipedia is by creating an account. People react more favorably to the edits of a person than to an IP address. Don't be afraid to edit pages you are capable of editing :] . Find an area in which you are interested and see if there is an associated project. Find people in the project and ask them what you can do to help out. Make friends! Establishing a group of people with whom you are familiar will help you through any stressful periods. • How can we, as women, work together to correct some of the systemic gender bias in Wikipedia? • Swarming - Developing entries ahead of time elsewhere in greenhouses or feminist think tanks and them adding them to Wikipedia when they're fleshed out - Notability, authority, sourcing - Telling our stories of experiencing bias (testimony) in a supportive environment, for validation

7. WikiChix FAQ • Section 2: I don't get it? for people who question the very idea • What are the pressures on women that contribute towards their lower levels of participation in Wikipedia? • Self-perception of expertise level - Unwillingness to become a target of sexist criticisms - Impatience with condescending attitudes - Confrontational situations like revert wars - • Separate channels for women are not needed because they're divisive. • WikiChix is intended as an additional possible channel for women, not as a replacement for existing channels. The existence of WikiChix does not imply that the issues of gender bias and encouraging female participation are no longer of interest to the existing channels. • Separate channels for women are not needed because they distract from the task at hand. We should just denounce sexism where we see it and get on with the job. • Puppy's post explains that the problem can be more insidious: simply "kicking out the bad people" won't work. The "bad people" is us. • How do you know there's a problem? I don't see any regular complaints of sexism. • Well, you're seeing a complaint now, so listen up. Relevant posts have been made by Puppy and Stan Shebs concerning women's tendency to avoid posting in channels they perceive to be intimidating. There is pressure in any system with power inequalities for those discriminated against not to complain. So, marginalizing "complaints of sexism" (for instance) is sexist in its own context. Sexism exists. And not only does it exist, it is so pervasive that its marginalization is essential for power inequalities to reinforce one another. • When I, or a system I am part of, is called out for sexism or bias, how can I respond? • Defensiveness is common; denying the validity of the person making the claim, as well. Long explanations of your own non-sexism is also to be expected. These reactions are not "wrong"; in fact they are probably necessary for you to work through. I would suggest this excellent essay on "Alas, A Blog" as a starting point; it is about racism, but it applies very well to discussions of sexism. In a nutshell, its advice is to look at the criticism seriously, and continue listening. • Isn't this just reverse sexism? I'm a man and feel like you're oppressing me. • No. Instead of feeling excluded, try to see it as an opportunity to hear a conversation you would not hear otherwise. If men are not talking, what women say to each other becomes a different conversation. When we as women can stop defending ourselves and explaining that bias, sexism, or patriarchy exist, then we can move further in discussion and support of each other.

8. WikiChix comments/leadership • Of course, it may be that many women do not want to be leaders. I doubt that this is universally the case, but if it is significantly true then perhaps we need to consider why this is, whether it is something that needs to be fixed, and if so, how to go about that. • I would note that the comments above relate mostly to my experience with wikis other than Wikipedia, and the bias towards male leadership I see there. And yes, I am aware that there are exceptions, like the current Wikimedia chair. I also know that at least one woman has left that very board over what seems to be a problem with the way it runs ("the collaborative consensus-based nature Wikimedia had before the start of this year continues to deteriorate and it's no longer an environment I can work effectively in."). If put in the same position, would other women feel the same way? Does Wikimedia reflect Wikipedia? • About significant wikis founded by women, or lack of -- I suspect this is related to both your leadership questions and wikidom in general. That is, I might be wrong, but I believe many of the most-successful wikis are focused either on technology in general or computer and video games more spefically. Both fields are dominated by men. (Then again, most fields are dominated by men, to varying degrees.) It just occurred to me that wikis are very yin-yang, for lack of a better phrase. They combine elements that are typically masculine and feminine to an uncommon degree. I think that to most of the population, wikis seem more technical than we initiates generally realize. But they are also intended as a cooperative environment. The leadership question is too big for me to respond to right now.