[WikiEN-l] Systemic bias wrt gender

Tue Nov 21 23:28:40 UTC 2006

The recent thread on the low numbers of women applying for ArbCom and  
subsequent discussion about systemic bias and under-representation of  
women has led me to wonder about the nature of gender-related  
systemic bias on the English Wikipedia. As far as "gender is  
irrelevant" goes, this is simply not true. Gender of editors really  
does matter as far as coverage and quality thereof goes. Most of the  
women I know spend one or two hours in the morning with a  
straightening iron and a blow dryer. Wikipedia has http:// 
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowdryer and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ 
Hair_iron . These two articles are considerably out of date and do  
not begin to encompass the complexities of these appliances (and  
there is not even separate articles for straightening irons and  
curling irons!). Compare to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer and  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television , the two appliances I have  
known men to use most. Or even to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ 
Microwave_oven and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refrigerator . Or to  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razor . The bias is there.

My question is not "Does systemic bias exist?" but rather "Where is  
systemic bias hurting us most?" From a coverage standpoint, we have  
vast comprehensive articles on sports of all kinds, but our ballet  
articles make me weep inside (I've just started a Ballet WikiProject  
to address this, but had been too intimidated to do so since first  
reading/editing until I met another female ballet dancer on wiki).  
However, how does this compare to the way policy is formed and  
implemented? Is an unequal ratio of men to women affecting the way we  
run things? Is it negatively impacting the structure of the  
encyclopedia? Is it proceeding in this way such that men find it  
easier to join and women do not? What is suffering the most from this  
bias, and are there ways to better receive the input of those who  
would otherwise not be heard?

As far as women reading the mailing list, I know that there are  
plenty who do (like myself), but do not discuss much. I know that I  
also read more than I edit, perhaps this is the case with more  
females than just myself?

Food for thought. :]
--Keitei
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keitei