Feminism in News and Popular Media

[Femmadian]

Allison, what makes you think I haven't read your post or "investigated" the issue? Because I don't agree with you?

I actually linked to the same developer explanation in my post that you are now telling me to read. For the record, I've read all five pages on his Tumblr, his Kickstarter, the site for his game development portfolio and presskit, Ektomarch, this interview with Blue Bird Plays, and have researched on my own his relatively short history as a game developer to familiarize myself with his work (such as his work on Subbania). The implication that the only reason I (or anyone) could possibly disagree with you is either through intellectual laziness or ignorance is incredibly insulting and patronizing.

I am well aware of how he he said he was using the term "post-feminist" as it appears we've read the same page. I have a different take on it. That doesn't mean I did not understand it or that I haven't read it.

I don't think the developer is a feminist from what I've read in interviews and on his pages and I don't think that the game captures any of the nuances of the subject matters he is attempting to tackle.

I've actually been mulling the matter over for a few days now and (not that it should matter) the response to your post was composed over the span of roughly two hours wherein I read and re-read your post several times. I would ask that you not insinuate knowledge about my level of comprehension or activity that you know nothing about.

I am well aware that the developer purports that the game is to be one dealing with government conspiracy vs the people but I have serious concerns with its execution and whether that message is evident in the game without the benefit of the developer having to explain himself ad nauseam.

I am also quite aware of the use of "meat shields" in the gaming industry. I still find them distasteful and given the highly sensitive nature of this specific game, I think it's a poor choice.

I find it disingenuous that you seem to not want to comment on the history of Andrea Dworkin being demonized by anti-feminists and hailed as some sort of "angry," catch-all mouthpiece for the entire movement by those who look to discredit it. I don't know if the developer is intending for that building to be a bar, a warehouse, a store, whatever, and I don't think it really matters. The point is that I find the inclusion of the name as background noise in this game to be, given the context, highly suspect and it raises feminist red flags for me.

Similarly, you can't just explain away overweight characters as simply being neutrally overweight or "fat" without talking about the context of stereotypes and the shaming of feminists as fat, ugly, and/or angry, which it is implied that these characters are. Do I think it's a coincidence that a game which depicts a woman-only post-feminist dystopia has its citizens alternately being portrayed as overweight or angry women? Absolutely not. You're supposed to sympathize with the protagonist who is thin and attractive (by game animation standards) and the civilians and/or fascist feminists are fat and ugly and shout things at the protagonist such as "get outta my face" as she walks by. It's about one step away from putting the good guys (gal) in a white hat and the bad ones in black hats and not subtle at all.

By the way, what exactly is a "normal-sized" woman? Are fat women and thin women by definition considered abnormal? Sounds like body shaming to me.

Moving on to the comment about slapping a female character's posterior:

Originally Posted by Allison W

Which was inappropriate of that commentator, but I'm actually not seeing where she's dressed provocatively. I also never saw the comment to begin with, because I didn't go digging through that post's mentions; I don't imagine many people did. It's fairly probable that the developer himself did not see the comment. Would you feel better if I asked the developer to publicly inform sokuzah that this is inappropriate? I don't know him, but there are ways to get ahold of people over Kickstarter or Tumblr.

So, if the developer had put her skirt/lab coat a few pixelated inches higher, that comment would have been okay to you...? Saying that you don't see her as dressing provocatively is completely missing the point. And I didn't go "digging" through the post to find something to be offended about. It's fairly close to the top of the post's notes and the developer would have been notified on Tumblr that someone commented on it. It's both indicative of and a larger part of an overall air of subtle (and sometimes not-so-subtle) feminist- and woman-shaming that I see with this game. Do you think a feminist would create the option or even the gif from one of their games with the main character non-consensually slapping the ass of a woman (which is assault...) with the simple caption "she doesn't like having her butt slapped"?

Would I "feel better" if you contacted the gamer on my behalf...? No. I'd "feel better" if the developer actually showed any feminist behaviour without first having to be prompted or called out on it. This isn't about someone's delicate little feelings being hurt (and it's really minimizing and condescending to suggest that my objections on that point amount to little more). It's about thinking critically about a subject which proclaims to be feminist and around which there is a fair amount of debate and conflicting opinion.

People are allowed to disagree with us and we don't get to decide for other people what is and isn't a significant enough level of research into a topic before they get to form an opinion about it and have it be one which we'll accept as valid and worthy of respect. I have to say that your post came off as incredibly patronizing, disrespectful, and insulting and assumes a lot about what I've personally read or think about this topic.

Furthermore, the idea that other members should be given news about this game by you first... why? Why do you place yourself as having intellectual or explanatory authority over anyone else? And what are "wrong sources" and who are you to decide for someone else what those might be?

Frankly, I'm not sure why you felt the need to edit your post to add that little parenthetical aside about thanking me for not threatening bodily harm to you...? I have never done anything of the sort to anyone and I don't know why you felt the need to include it. It feels unnecessary and gross and honestly, it goes a way towards painting those who disagree with you on this issue as raging, irrational "harpies" who cannot have a logical debate. That sounds pretty sexist to me and I'm not okay with being praised (even backhandedly) by virtue of insulting other women in the process. That's not something I ever agreed to.

Ultimately, I hope that people are able to make up their own minds about this and really, anything else which may be in this thread. We are not and do not have to be of a hive mind here and we are allowed to form our own opinions without the sanction of someone else. The diversity of thought and expression is one of the incredibly positive aspects of this community and one of the main reasons I continue to come here. I think that if that is to continue (and there's no reason to think it won't) then there is a need for respect for the difference in opinions as well as the people holding them by all members and for all members, even if you don't understand or particularly care for either it or them.

[Kobi]

I am not a gamer but I, too, have seen the concerns raised about this "game" for several weeks.

From the developer:

In 2XXX, women from around the world migrated to central Bulgaria to escape centuries of oppression. In an attempt to halt its rapid decline, Plovdiv was restructured as a bastion of feminist ideals. Twelve years later, Plovdiv became the last remaining city on Earth. The city flourished into a haven for women and its pride became its stability, proof of the success of its founding females' principles.

And yet, society became apathetic to its fellow citizens' discontent.

Government and private individuals soon hired assassins to resolve their “problems”, and this underground system became the replacement for due process. It was a necessary reality in a system that came to shut out the concerns of its women. It was well accepted that the state's alleged political ideals were sufficient for guaranteeing absolute peace and security. The only solution was to resort to "alternative methods", which increasingly became common practice in a society who praised a good image as being next to godliness.

Our heroine is Ceyda Farhi, a twenty-something Bulgarian Turk, trans woman, and assassin. Her willingness to put a job ahead of her own life gives her steady employment. While the bulk of her jobs entail grudges or handling problematic no-names, she starts to notice traces of interconnectedness in each of her jobs, having far grander repercussions than she could've ever imagined. The fate of Plovdiv hangs in the balance as Ceyda navigates the layers of a conspiracy: Every major society and empire–from the Akkadians to the Shang, from the Romans to the Nazis–has been guided by one immortal force. Plovdiv is now another link in the chain. But how?

While fearing the rapid decline of her mental state and feeling the world of unbelievable conspiracies spiraling around her, she knows that she must tell the world the truth before it's too late for her and womankind. Two problems stand between her and alerting everyone of the truth: who could ever believe her? And in a society where being a woman is being human, does Ceyda--a trans woman who's often not regarded as being a "whole" woman--have any responsibility to save those who look down on her?

Aerannis hopes to give players an insight into the struggles of gender identity and empowerment in an oppressive world without in any way sacrificing the intensity of 2D action games.



Even tho I have been unable to track down the sex of the developer(s), what I see in their "explanation" is a lot of man speak i.e. believe our intent as opposed to what we actually developed.

I also see a gross misunderstanding of what feminism is, thus the portrayal of a feminist society gone bad looks just like the patriarchy i.e. same power dynamics, same oppression, same violence, same isms.

And, the developers stated goal is about the struggle for gender identity and empowerment....which apparently can only be achieved thru violence.

To me, this is just the same crap, different game.

[Allison W]

Femmadian: Indeed we are allowed to disagree, and for all that there are concerns that we actually do share, I'm going to invoke exactly that right here. We don't agree and aren't going to.

Originally Posted by Kobi

Even tho I have been unable to track down the sex of the developer(s), what I see in their "explanation" is a lot of man speak i.e. believe our intent as opposed to what we actually developed.

He's a man, though he's not the only person on the writing team, and it does include a trans woman. (Had she been given more control over the publicity, this might have gone better.)

Originally Posted by Kobi

I also see a gross misunderstanding of what feminism is, thus the portrayal of a feminist society gone bad looks just like the patriarchy i.e. same power dynamics, same oppression, same violence, same isms.

I'm still pretty sure that the conspiracy at the top is a metaphor for patriarchy, but obviously I can't make anyone agree with me on that.

Originally Posted by Kobi

And, the developers stated goal is about the struggle for gender identity and empowerment....which apparently can only be achieved thru violence.

To me, this is just the same crap, different game.

I'm resisting the urge to get into a dissertation about how the fact that men have been permitted almost sole ownership of violence is what's enabled patriarchy to run rampant throughout virtually every society and that nothing short of women's violence will change that, but pacifism is fashionable and so I don't really expect a lot of agreement.

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Allison W

I'm resisting the urge to get into a dissertation about how the fact that men have been permitted almost sole ownership of violence is what's enabled patriarchy to run rampant throughout virtually every society and that nothing short of women's violence will change that, but pacifism is fashionable and so I don't really expect a lot of agreement.

Can you explain this , minus the dissertation? Not sure what this actually says.

[Allison W]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Can you explain this , minus the dissertation? Not sure what this actually says.

I get this warm and fuzzy feeling in my chest whenever I hear of a woman who beat the shit out of a man who thought he could victimise her because he thought violence belonged to him and not her and learned otherwise.

I suppose if I wanted to put it in more academic terms, I could say that I think a lot of the fundamental power imbalance between men and women in our society is that women are taught that they don't own violence (whereas men are taught that they do own it), and that nothing else will fix that fundamental power imbalance until women get that same tacit message that they own their share of the use of force, because at the end of the day, whether it's an "acceptable" form of power or not, it is absolutely a form of power. Peace, on the other hand, is pleasant, and non-threatening, and exactly what the patriarchy expects of women. It might be a controversial opinion, but I've stated it more than once on these fora.

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Allison W

I get this warm and fuzzy feeling in my chest whenever I hear of a woman who beat the shit out of a man who thought he could victimise her because he thought violence belonged to him and not her and learned otherwise.

I suppose if I wanted to put it in more academic terms, I could say that I think a lot of the fundamental power imbalance between men and women in our society is that women are taught that they don't own violence (whereas men are taught that they do own it), and that nothing else will fix that fundamental power imbalance until women get that same tacit message that they own their share of the use of force, because at the end of the day, whether it's an "acceptable" form of power or not, it is absolutely a form of power. Peace, on the other hand, is pleasant, and non-threatening, and exactly what the patriarchy expects of women. It might be a controversial opinion, but I've stated it more than once on these fora.

Ahhh ok, now I am following your train of thought. This explains why we disagree on the methodology and message of this game. It also explains why this was topic was put in the feminism thread as opposed to the misogyny and sexism thread.

As a point of reference, feminism is about the eradication of power, control, and violence which are the hallmarks of a patriarchal framework and mindset.

And, feminists tend to get warm and fuzzy feelings from justice, not violence.

[Allison W]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Ahhh ok, now I am following your train of thought. This explains why we disagree on the methodology and message of this game. It also explains why this was topic was put in the feminism thread as opposed to the misogyny and sexism thread.

As a point of reference, feminism is about the eradication of power, control, and violence which are the hallmarks of a patriarchal framework and mindset.

And, feminists tend to get warm and fuzzy feelings from justice, not violence.

I appreciate that this particular line of discussion has remained civil (for some values of civil, I suppose), but I have absolutely no faith in it ever being remotely feasible to completely eradicate power, control, and violence. They can be reduced, they can be managed, they can be distributed in patterns that result in fewer people getting ground in the gears, but humans are still animals. Endurance predators, to be specific, with some degree of predator instincts inherent to us. Good is possible, better is possible, but perfect just isn't an option. I'm not about to turn down "better" because it wasn't the "perfect" I wanted. Perfect is a pipe dream and that way lies madness.

I'd also appreciate it if you didn't presume to define your brand of feminism as the only one. I know you don't care for liberalism any more than I care for radicalism, but that was kind of patronising.

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Allison W

I appreciate that this particular line of discussion has remained civil (for some values of civil, I suppose), but I have absolutely no faith in it ever being remotely feasible to completely eradicate power, control, and violence. They can be reduced, they can be managed, they can be distributed in patterns that result in fewer people getting ground in the gears, but humans are still animals. Endurance predators, to be specific, with some degree of predator instincts inherent to us. Good is possible, better is possible, but perfect just isn't an option, and be mindful that you don't turn down a better world because it wasn't the perfect world you wanted.

I'd also appreciate it if you didn't presume to define your brand of feminism as the only one. I know you don't care for liberalism any more than I care for radicalism, but that was kind of patronising.

Obviously, we have a fundamental difference of opinion.

I dont see people as predatory animals in an endurance contest. To me, thinking that way means humans are slaves to animalistic impulses and incapable of change. To me, this is a hopelessness about human nature and the human condition.

My beliefs are contrary to that. I believe in people. I believe human beings have the capacity of higher levels of thought, feeling, reasoning, leading to the capacity to change. I have hope.

We can agree to disagree on that point.

The basic tenets of feminism have not changed since their inception. What I am speaking to has nothing to do with liberal, conservative, or radical ideology.

We can also agree to disagree on this.

Have a good evening.

[Kobi]

Robin Morgan is an author, activist and feminist. She is also a co-founder, with Gloria Steinem and Jane Fonda, of the Women's Media Center

I know, I know, TIME’s annual word-banning poll is meant as a joke, and this year’s inclusion of the word feminist wasn’t an attempt to end a movement. But as a writer — and feminist who naturally has no sense of humor — banning words feels, well, uncomfortable. The fault lies in the usage or overusage, not the word — even dumb or faddish words.

Feminist is neither of those. Nevertheless, I once loathed it. In 1968, while organizing the first protest against the Miss America Pageant, I called myself a “women’s liberationist,” because “feminist” seemed so 19th century: ladies scooting around in hoop skirts with ringlet curls cascading over their ears!

What an ignoramus I was. But school hadn’t taught me who they really were, and the media hadn’t either. We Americans forget or rewrite even our recent history, and accomplishments of any group not pale and male have tended to get downplayed or erased — one reason why Gloria Steinem, Jane Fonda and I founded the Women’s Media Center: to make women visible and powerful in media.

No, it took assembling and researching my anthology Sisterhood Is Powerful to teach me about the word feminism. I had no clue that feminists had been a major (or leading) presence in every social-justice movement in the U.S. time line: the revolutionary war, the campaigns to abolish slavery, debtors’ prisons and sweatshops; mobilizations for suffrage, prison reform, equal credit; fights to establish social security, unions, universal childhood education, halfway houses, free libraries; plus the environmentalism, antiwar and peace movements. And more. By 1970, I was a feminist.

Throughout that decade, feminism was targeted for ridicule. Here’s how it plays: first they ignore you, then laugh at you, then prosecute you, then try to co-opt you, then — once you win — they claim they gave you your rights: after a century of women organizing, protesting, being jailed, going on hunger strikes and being brutally force-fed, “they” gave women the vote.

We outlasted being a joke only to find our adversaries had repositioned “feminist” as synonymous with “lesbian” — therefore oooh, “dangerous.” These days — given recent wins toward marriage equality and the end of “don’t ask don’t tell” in the military, not to mention the popularity of Orange Is the New Black — it’s strange to recall how, in the ’70s, that connotation scared many heterosexual women away from claiming the word feminist. But at least it gave birth to a witty button of which I’ve always been especially fond: “How dare you assume I’m straight?!”

Yet in the 1980s the word was still being avoided. You’d hear maddening contradictions like “I’m no feminist, but …” after which feminist statements would pour from the speaker’s mouth. Meanwhile, women’s-rights activists of color preferred culturally organic versions: womanist among African Americans, mujerista among Latinas. I began using feminisms to more accurately depict and affirm such a richness of constituencies. Furthermore, those of us working in the global women’s movement found it fitting to celebrate what I termed a “multiplicity of feminisms.”

No matter the name, the movement kept growing. Along the way, the word absorbed the identity politics of the 1980s and ’90s, ergo cultural feminism, radical feminism, liberal/reform feminism, electoral feminism, academic feminism, ecofeminism, lesbian feminism, Marxist feminism, socialist feminism — and at times hybrids of the above.

Flash-forward to today when, despite predictions to the contrary, young women are furiously active online and off, and are adopting “the F word” with far greater ease and rapidity than previous feminists. Women of color have embraced the words feminism and feminist as their own, along with women all over the world, including Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia.

As we move into 2015, feminism is suddenly hot; celebrities want to identify with it. While such irony makes me smile wryly, I know we live in a celebrity culture and this brings more attention to issues like equal pay, full reproductive rights, and ending violence against women. I also know that sincere women (and men of conscience), celebs or not, will stay with the word and what it stands for. Others will just peel off when the next flavor of the month comes along.

Either way, the inexorable forward trajectory of this global movement persists, powered by women in Nepal’s rice paddies fighting for literacy rights; women in Kenya’s Green Belt Movement planting trees for microbusiness and the environment; Texas housewives in solidarity with immigrant women to bring and keep families together; and survivors speaking out about prostitution not being “sex work” or “just another job,” but a human-rights violation. From boardroom to Planned Parenthood clinic, this is feminism.

The dictionary definition is simple: “the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.” Anyone who can’t support something that commonsensical and fair is part of a vanishing breed: well over half of all American women and more than 30% of American men approve of the word — the percentages running even higher in communities of color and internationally.

But I confess that for me feminism means something more profound. It means freeing a political force: the power, energy and intelligence of half the human species hitherto ignored or silenced. More than any other time in history, that force is needed to save this imperiled blue planet. Feminism, for me, is the politics of the 21st century.

http://time.com/3588846/time-apologi...-robin-morgan/

[Kobi]

DIRECTOR'S STATEMENT

Feminism seems to be the scariest word in the English language. But not for those of us who experienced the game-changing awakening that was the Women’s Movement of the 1970s. Growing up in the fifties and sixties meant not only second class citizenship legally, but 2nd class human being-ship: not invited to the party of medicine, art, law, education, science, religion, except maybe as the secretary. Our film, FEMINISTS: What were they thinking? digs deep into our personal experiences of sexism and of liberation, and follows this ever-challenging dialogue right into the 21st century. We are taking it personally.

Link To Film Page

[Kobi]

Gina Marie Raimondo (born May 17, 1971) is an American politician, businesswoman, and venture capitalist, and the Governor-elect of the State of Rhode Island. Raimondo, a member of the Democratic Party, will become the first woman to serve as Governor of Rhode Island. [1]

She has served as the General Treasurer for the State of Rhode Island since 2011. She is the second Rhode Island woman to serve as Treasurer. She was selected as the Democratic Party candidate for Rhode Island Governor in the 2014 election. Raimondo won the election with 40% of the vote on November 4, 2014.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gina_Raimondo

[Kelt]

German cabinet approves gender quota law

"After years of debate about its effectiveness, German Chancellor Angela Merkel's cabinet has now approved legislation for more female representation in top boardrooms. If it's passed by parliament the new law will come into effect in 2016. Currently less than one in five members of supervisory boards in Germany is held by a woman."

The new law will require large corporations to have a 30% representation of women in top positions. Follow the link to see the video as it aired today on DW news.

[Kobi]

[Kobi]

VATICAN CITY (AP) — A sweeping Vatican investigation into Roman Catholic nuns in the U.S. that began amid fears they had become too feminist and secular ended up praising the sisters for their selfless work caring for the poor — a major shift in tone that reflected the social justice mindset of Pope Francis.

The overwhelmingly positive report Tuesday also promised to value their "feminine genius" more, while gently suggesting ways to serve the church faithfully and survive amid a steep drop in their numbers. It was cheered by the American sisters themselves, dozens of whom swarmed the Vatican news conference announcing the results in a rare occasion of women outnumbering men at the Vatican.

"There is an encouraging and realistic tone in this report," Sister Sharon Holland told reporters. "Challenges are understood, but it is not a document of blame, or of simplistic solutions. One can read the text and feel appreciated and trusted to carry on."

The report was most remarkable for what it didn't say, given the criticism of American religious life that prompted the Vatican under Pope Benedict XVI to launch the investigation in 2009.

There was no critique of the nuns, no demands that they shift their focus from social justice to emphasize Catholic teaching on abortion, no condemnation that a feminist, secular mentality had taken hold in their ranks.

Rather, while offering a sobering assessment of the difficult state of American congregations, the report praised the sisters' dedication and reaffirmed their calling in a reflection of the pastoral tone characteristic of history's first Jesuit pope.

It was a radically different message than that of another Vatican office that investigated an umbrella group of the sisters' leaders.

That investigation, conducted by the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, resulted in a Vatican takeover of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious in 2012. The doctrine office determined that the LCWR, which represents the leaders of 80 percent of U.S. nuns, took positions that undermined church teaching and promoted "radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith."

The Vatican's congregation for religious orders has long sought to distinguish its broad investigation into the quality of life of American sisters from the more narrow doctrinal assessment carried out by the orthodoxy office.

But both investigations began within months of one another and resulted in tremendous feelings of betrayal and insult from the sisters.

The probes also prompted an outpouring of support from rank-and-file American Catholics who viewed the investigations as a crackdown by a misogynistic, all-male Vatican hierarchy against the underpaid, underappreciated women who do the lion's share of work running Catholic hospitals, schools and services for the poor.

Theological conservatives have long complained that after the reforms of the 1960s Second Vatican Council, women's congregations in the U.S. became secular and political while abandoning traditional prayer life and faith. The nuns insisted that prayer and Christ were central to their work.

Holland, who heads the Leadership Conference, acknowledged that the investigation was initially met with apprehension and distrust, particularly among elderly sisters who "felt that their whole lives had been judged and found wanting."

But she said the results showed that the Vatican had listened and heard what the sisters had to say.

Asked if the change in tone reflected Francis' new leadership, Holland said "I'm willing to give him all sorts of credit."

"He's been a great encouragement and hope to a lot of us," she said.

The report outlined the bleak reality facing American women's congregations now: The current number of 50,000 U.S. sisters represents a fraction of the 125,000 in the mid-1960s, although that was an atypical spike in U.S. church history.

The average age of U.S. nuns today is mid-to-late 70s. They are facing dwindling finances to care for their sisters as they age and haven't had much success in finding new vocations. The report asked the sisters to make sure their training programs reflect church teaching and ensure their members pray and focus on Christ.

It stressed an appreciation for their work and expressed hope that they take "this present moment as an opportunity to transform uncertainty and hesitancy into collaborative trust" with the church hierarchy.

The report noted many sisters have complained that their work often went unrecognized by priests and requested improved dialogue with bishops to clarify their role in the church and give them greater voice in decisions.

The report noted that Francis, who has pledged to bring more women into decision-making positions in the church, has recently asked the Vatican to update a key document outlining the relationship between bishops and religious orders.

Given that the report didn't find any major problems or recommend any major changes in the way U.S. religious live out their vocations, the question arose about whether the tensions the investigation produced — not to mention the time, cost and effort involved — were worth it.

"I would say it was worth it," Holland said. "We benefited in ways we didn't know we would benefit."

Signaling that the change in the Vatican's tone might also extend to the LCWR crackdown, Holland said she was "working hard and working well" with Vatican-appointed delegates who took over the Leadership Conference and that the process might end sooner than originally expected.

"We're moving toward resolution of that," she said.

http://news.yahoo.com/vatican-praise...112527933.html

[Kobi]

Last Saturday, about 600 volunteers in 31 venues around the globe engaged in a collective effort to change the world, one Wikipedia entry at a time.

In the United States, Canada, Australia, Italy, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, in nonprofits and art schools, in museums and universities, these people—mostly women—set out to write entries, uncredited and unpaid, for the fast-growing crowd-sourced online encyclopedia.
Editors working around the resource table, Wikipedia Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon, at Eyebeam in New York City.

They had answered a call for the Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon, a massive multinational effort to correct a persistent bias in Wikipedia, which is disproportionally written by and about men.

The event, whose epicenter was the New York art and technology center Eyebeam, is part of a larger movement, only now reaching the art world, to upload content to Wikipedia in a proactive manner.

At a time when Wikipedia is becoming increasingly influential, “it’s really tangible to be able to fix something that is visibly wrong,” says Jacqueline Mabey, a co-organizer of Saturday’s Edit-a-Thon with Siân Evans of the Art Libraries Society of North America’s Women and Art Special Interest Group, Michael Mandiberg, an artist and associate professor at CUNY who teaches with Wikipedia, and current Eyebeam Fellow Laurel Ptak.

More than 150 people crowded into Eyebeam’s Chelsea headquarters during Saturday’s event, while satellite venues reported turnouts ranging from 6 to 60.

Volunteers versed in the process, protocol, and ethic of Wikipedia gave tutorials to the newcomers, who were mostly artists, activists, students, and scholars. They learned what constitutes a proper reference, how to create external links, and when and where to put footnotes. They learned that people can’t write about themselves, and what kind of sources are acceptable.

By the end of the day, around 100 new entries were up (around 80 more were enhanced). The new pages, devoted to figures ranging from Australian modernists Ethel Spowers and Dorrit Black to Catalan painter Josefa Texidor i Torres to contemporary artists including Mary Miss, Xaviera Simmons, Audrey Flack, and Monika Bravo, vary widely in scope, grammar, and quality of content. But the Wikipedia team expects that blips will vanish as the hive mind has its work on the entries.

“You have someone you know a lot about? It takes ten minutes,” says Ximena Gallardo C., a gender and film scholar at LaGuardia Community College. “This is the world brain. It’s just starting.”

Nicole Casamento, a former ARTnews intern who runs the website Culture Grinder, attended the Brooklyn Museum meetup, where she created the first Wikipedia page for the artist Senga Nengudi.

“The event seemed like a new kind of consciousness raising that was very goal-oriented,” says Casamento, a masters student in American literature at Brooklyn College. “It was aimed at writing women into history in a new way for the digital age—by giving more women the awareness and tools to take matters in their own hands.”

The National Museum of Women in the Arts, Wikimedia DC and the Smithsonian’s Archives of American Art have scheduled the next Women in the Arts edit-a-thon for March 30.

- See more at: http://www.artnews.com/2014/02/06/ar....bwXfHsL6.dpuf

[Kobi]

STOCKPORT, England (Reuters) - The Church of England appointed its first female bishop on Wednesday, overturning centuries of tradition in a Church that has been deeply divided over the issue.

It named Reverend Libby Lane, a 48-year-old married mother of two, as the new Bishop of Stockport in northern England.

After long and heated debate, the Church of England governing Synod voted in July to allow women to become bishops and formally adopted legislation last month.

Women have served as priests in the Church since 1994, a decision that prompted some 470 male priests to leave in protest, many for the Roman Catholic Church.

“It is an unexpected joy for me to be here today," Lane said in her acceptance speech. "It is a remarkable day for me and I realise an historic day for the church."

She added: “I am conscious this morning of countless women and men who for decades have looked forward to the time when the Church of England would announce its first woman bishop.”

The issue of women bishops has caused internal division ever since the Synod first approved female priests.

It has pitted reformers, keen to project a more modern image of the Church as it struggles with falling congregations in many increasingly secular countries, against a conservative minority which says the change contradicts the Bible.

Two years ago, opposition from traditionalist lay members led to the defeat of a vote in the Synod to allow women bishops, to the dismay of modernisers and the Church hierarchy.

Women serve as bishops in the United States, Australia, Canada and New Zealand but Anglican churches in many developing countries do not ordain them as priests.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/church-eng...101027972.html

[Kobi]

[Kobi]

Tens of thousands of women participated in the March on Washington on Aug. 28, 1963. But none of the female civil rights leaders marched in the procession with Dr. King, nor were any of them invited to speak to the enormous crowd.

Instead, these women were asked to march on an adjacent street with the wives of the male leaders and to stay in the background.

The small role allowed female civil rights leaders in the activities of that day was the exact opposite of the central role these women played in planning the strategies, tactics and actions of the movement — including the march itself!

In fact, many of the most iconic campaigns of the civil rights movement were coordinated by women, including nonviolent sit-ins at segregated lunch counters, forced integration of Central High School by the Little Rock Nine, and the voter registration drives of 1964's Freedom Summer.

Let's celebrate the legacy of Martin Luther King by learning about and remembering the overlooked women leading the struggle for equal rights right by his side.

Daisy Bates (1914 – 1999) was the force behind the integration of Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1957. She recruited, organized and supported the nine teenagers — six girls and three boys — and their families who were chosen to desegregate the school under court order.

White mobs rallied at the school in the early days, hurling insults and threatening violence. Ultimately, it took the U.S. Army to escort the black students to school and keep them safe, which showed the nation that the federal government was serious about enforcing integration.

It was Daisy Bates and the local NAACP who planned, coordinated and executed the Little Rock Nine strategy. Bates was rewarded for her efforts with rocks thrown through her windows, a cross burned on her roof and the financial demise of the newspaper she and her husband owned.

Pauli Murray (1910 – 1985) was a groundbreaking legal scholar, lifelong activist for civil rights and women's rights and, in her later years, the first African-American woman ordained as an Episcopal priest.

In 1950, Murray published a legal study of the segregation laws in the states. In it, she argued that civil rights lawyers should stop taking a gradual approach to changing segregation and should instead argue straightforwardly that segregation itself violated the U.S. Constitution. Thurgood Marshall, lead counsel in Brown v. Board of Education and later, a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, called this book the "bible" of the Civil Rights movement.

Murray also turned her sharp legal mind to gender discrimination. In 1961, as a member of the Presidential Commission on the Status of Women, she wrote a memo arguing that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution outlawed gender discrimination as well as race discrimination. In 1963, she became one of the first to criticize the leaders of the civil rights movement for its overt sexism.

In 1966, she became a co-founder of the National Organization for Women.

Fannie Lou Hamer (1917 – 1977) was one of the founders of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee and deeply committed to helping African-Americans gain their voting rights. In the deep south at that time such activity was often met with violence. She was well known for singing hymns to keep up the spirits of the people who were putting themselves in danger to register themselves or others to vote.

In July 1963, she and a group of activists were returning by bus from a workshop when they were stopped, arrested and then savagely beaten. Despite this ordeal, Hamer continued her advocacy work, including organizing the Freedom Summer campaign in the summer of 1964.

Also in the summer of 1964, Hamer attended the Democratic National Convention as the vice chair of the Mississippi "Freedom Democrats." Their goal was to challenge the all-white, anti-civil-rights Mississippi delegation to the convention as not representative of Mississippi Democrats. Their challenge drew national attention, and a speech given by Hamer was seen on national television. Her eloquence and passion changed the tenor of the debate at the convention.

Dorothy Height (1912 – 2010) was a social worker, educator and activist for civil rights and women's rights. Among Height's achievements was coordinating the integration of the facilities of the YMCA in 1946. She also co-founded the Center for Racial Justice in 1965. She served as president of the National Council of Negro Women from 1957 to 1997. During the 1960s, she organized "Wednesdays in Mississippi" to bring together white and black women for conversation and to increase understanding. She has been described as one of the "Big Six" in the civil rights movement.

Height described her experience of the sexism of the March on Washington as an "eye-opening experience." She turned at least some of her attention to women's rights, and in 1971 she helped found the National Women's Political Caucus with Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan and Shirley Chisholm.

http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/s...ights-movement

[Kobi]

[Cin]

This article by Emer O’Toole made me smile, a sad smile, but definitely a smile.

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandst...ism-has-ruined