Glass ceiling for female admins? Options

[LamontStormstar]

On the females on getting checkuser or oversight. First by female in this instance I mean someone born female, not male to female transgender.

Well in the oversight list there's Theresa knott so there's one person with oversight that was born female. There might be someone else, but I don't recognize anyone. Taxman, by the way, is not "Taxwoman" who a female friend of Poetlister.

Well I mentioned Minspillage on ArbCom, running for the board (did she make it? I'm not sure where to look) and I found this http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=59418079

== Oversight ==

I've temporarily removed your oversight privilege, as it appears you've been removing some edits that aren't legal issues. Use of this tool needs to kept to the absolute minimum due to the way it removes evidence completely from public history. --[[User:Brion VIBBER|Brion]] 22:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

So it looks like Mindspillage did something that made her lose Oversight and she doesn't have it currently. So maybe that's why she hasn't got checkuser.

Although I could be missing somebody, out of checkuser and Oversight, one female has Oversight and the rest were born male. That's pretty sexist.

This post has been edited by LamontStormstar: Fri 14th September 2007, 8:50pm

[the fieryangel]

On the females on getting checkuser or oversight. First by female in this instance I mean someone born female, not male to female transgender.

Well in the oversight list there's Theresa knott so there's one person with oversight that was born female. There might be someone else, but I don't recognize anyone. Taxman, by the way, is not "Taxwoman" who a female friend of Poetlister.

Well I mentioned Minspillage on ArbCom, running for the board (did she make it? I'm not sure where to look) and I found this http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=59418079

== Oversight ==

I've temporarily removed your oversight privilege, as it appears you've been removing some edits that aren't legal issues. Use of this tool needs to kept to the absolute minimum due to the way it removes evidence completely from public history. --[[User:Brion VIBBER|Brion]] 22:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

So it looks like Mindspillage did something that made her lose Oversight and she doesn't have it currently. So maybe that's why she hasn't got checkuser.

Although I could be missing somebody, out of checkuser and Oversight, one female has Oversight and the rest were born male. That's pretty sexist.

Let me put this in no uncertain terms. Until all areas of Wikipedia Power are 50/50 male/female, Wikipedia is a "old boys' club". The fact that Floflo is a figurehead "chairperson" is beside the point, because she's completely incompetent.

Wikipedia is sexist and is likely to remain so. That's one of its main problems right there.

This post has been edited by the fieryangel: Fri 14th September 2007, 9:40pm

[Viridae]

Hmm - now why hasn't Jayjg had his removed for the same offence?

[GlassBeadGame]

Wikipedia is sexist and is likely to remain so. That's one of its main problems right there.

It is a special kind of sexism usually attributed to immature nerdy middle schools boys. If we can straighten out WP we should next take on The History Channel.

[KamrynMatika]

Hm.. sexism or merely a representation of the makeup of Wikipedia users? I haven't come across that many females.

[LamontStormstar]

Hmm - now why hasn't Jayjg had his removed for the same offence?

Good question. I read it was but it was given back.

[the fieryangel]

Hm.. sexism or merely a representation of the makeup of Wikipedia users? I haven't come across that many females.

Um, yeah.....but have you ever considered why??

That's the question to ask...

Females aren't welcome because it's all about what the WASP ole' boyz (Jimbo included) think. We don't want anything else...

I'll go even further. The only females who make it in that environment are those who are willing to behave like refugees from the English National Rugby team lockerroom...Look at Pottymouth Makemi and you'll see what I mean.

They don't want women's knowledge. It's all about validating what a buncha white guyz think....Which is why you have "list of big bust performers" and you don't have "list of big dick performers".

Jzg would never stand for that, anyway!.

This post has been edited by the fieryangel: Fri 14th September 2007, 10:37pm

[Kato]

Um, yeah.....but have you ever considered why??

That's the question to ask...

Females aren't welcome because it's all about what the WASP ole' boyz (Jimbo included) think. We don't want anything else...

I think it's more likely that the whole act of collecting minute pieces of information and doing so at a computer desk is a hobby that is particularly appealing to a certain type of young male.

Boys collect stats. Football, baseball, cricket, you name it. That's what they love to do. You don't get many girls who are trainspotters.

[jorge]

and you don't have "list of big dick performers".

Actually there was..

[BobbyBombastic]

They don't want women's knowledge. It's all about validating what a buncha white guyz think....Which is why you have "list of big bust performers" and you don't have "list of big dick performers".

Jzg would never stand for that, anyway!.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Art...ng_well_endowed

i found out about that researching something else and would like to assure everyone here i am the complete opposite of gay.

[Somey]

I'll go even further. The only females who make it in that environment are those who are willing to behave like refugees from the English National Rugby team lockerroom...Look at Pottymouth Makemi and you'll see what I mean.

Good point. And at the risk of coming off as sexist myself, it may be that sites like Wikipedia (if not Wikipedia specifically) encourage a certain level of male-like aggressiveness in female users, which is probably both good and bad, if you know what I mean.

They don't want women's knowledge. It's all about validating what a buncha white guyz think...

I'm not so sure it's quite so bad as that... IOW, it's not that they don't want contributions from women, it seems more like they don't comprehend the female perspective, at least on issues where it's generally going to be different from the male perspective. In the end it might amount to the same thing, though, since they end up not understanding why they should have to include that perspective.

I shouldn't pretend to understand it myself, of course, but it's fairly clear in areas where it's a problem - a lot of the articles on religion and the vagaries of various "third-world" cultures have this problem, not to mention numerous biographies. And also rugby, of course.

[Unrepentant Vandal]

Let me put this in no uncertain terms. Until all areas of Wikipedia Power are 50/50 male/female, Wikipedia is a "old boys' club". The fact that Floflo is a figurehead "chairperson" is beside the point, because she's completely incompetent.

Wikipedia is sexist and is likely to remain so. That's one of its main problems right there.

"old boys club"!??!?!?

old alt.religion.scientology/slashdot/zionist/(insert balkan country) club more like.

Positive discrimination is evil. There is no reason that Wikipedia should be representative.

I am not defending Wikipedia here, I am just attacking your position.

[Kato]

Positive discrimination is evil. There is no reason that Wikipedia should be representative.

I am not defending Wikipedia here, I am just attacking your position.

Margo Leadbetter, is that you?

[Unrepentant Vandal]

Positive discrimination is evil. There is no reason that Wikipedia should be representative.

I am not defending Wikipedia here, I am just attacking your position.

Margo Leadbetter, is that you?

"Conservative"? Pah, bunch of lefties!

[dtobias]

As a libertarian, I oppose both the PC posturing of the left and the moral grandstanding of the right, and support individualism.

[guy]

old alt.religion.scientology/slashdot/zionist/(insert balkan country) club more like.

I think we can be quite confident that there is little if any overlap between scientologists and Zionists, and where do the Balkans come in?

[Unrepentant Vandal]

old alt.religion.scientology/slashdot/zionist/(insert balkan country) club more like.

I think we can be quite confident that there is little if any overlap between scientologists and Zionists, and where do the Balkans come in?

I wasn't implying that it was the same club! More that there are cliques from those groups that came onto Wikipedia in the early days... Alt.Religion.Scientology might be the most interesting, as their number is much less than that of slashdotters/zionists/generic nationalist with 600 year old memory, but they are heavily represented on Wikipedia. Even dear Kelly Martin iirc...

[the fieryangel]

old alt.religion.scientology/slashdot/zionist/(insert balkan country) club more like.

I think we can be quite confident that there is little if any overlap between scientologists and Zionists, and where do the Balkans come in?

I wasn't implying that it was the same club! More that there are cliques from those groups that came onto Wikipedia in the early days... Alt.Religion.Scientology might be the most interesting, as their number is much less than that of slashdotters/zionists/generic nationalist with 600 year old memory, but they are heavily represented on Wikipedia. Even dear Kelly Martin iirc...

Look at the demographics and look at the number of women in positions of power in WP. The only way around this is to have quotas, like it or not. Plus, you need to specifically make changes which allow women more freedom to be able to express themselves outside of the "lockerroom".

Call it leftist. Call it what you want, but it's the only solution.

And WP is not going to do this, because it is an old boys' club....right, Jimbo???

[Unrepentant Vandal]

old alt.religion.scientology/slashdot/zionist/(insert balkan country) club more like.

I think we can be quite confident that there is little if any overlap between scientologists and Zionists, and where do the Balkans come in?

I wasn't implying that it was the same club! More that there are cliques from those groups that came onto Wikipedia in the early days... Alt.Religion.Scientology might be the most interesting, as their number is much less than that of slashdotters/zionists/generic nationalist with 600 year old memory, but they are heavily represented on Wikipedia. Even dear Kelly Martin iirc...

Look at the demographics and look at the number of women in positions of power in WP. The only way around this is to have quotas, like it or not. Plus, you need to specifically make changes which allow women more freedom to be able to express themselves outside of the "lockerroom".

Call it leftist. Call it what you want, but it's the only solution.

And WP is not going to do this, because it is an old boys' club....right, Jimbo???

Demographics of what, precisely?

[guy]

Look at the demographics and look at the number of women in positions of power in WP. The only way around this is to have quotas, like it or not.

This only works if everybody is positively identified so you know who is male and who is female, and you have a cast-iron definition of male and female to allow for TSs, TVs etc.