Geek Feminism Wiki
(merged discussion points; organization?)
(a few notes)
Line 11: Line 11:
 
*I also wonder if we should have explicit positions on a few things. Eg: we are not sympathetic to TERF viewpoints, we are not sympathetic to health or body policing (some people do see this as feminist), others?
 
*I also wonder if we should have explicit positions on a few things. Eg: we are not sympathetic to TERF viewpoints, we are not sympathetic to health or body policing (some people do see this as feminist), others?
 
[[User:Thayvian|Thayvian]] ([[User talk:Thayvian|talk]]) 04:50, November 15, 2013 (UTC)
 
[[User:Thayvian|Thayvian]] ([[User talk:Thayvian|talk]]) 04:50, November 15, 2013 (UTC)
: I think I've now merged in the points above and everything I can recall from that discussion. And yes, imho we could definitely use more points re: what we consider consistent with our view of intersectional feminism.
+
: I think I've now merged in the points above and everything I can recall from that discussion. And yes, imho we could definitely use more points re: what we consider consistent with our view of intersectional feminism.
: If anyone has any ideas re organization & sections, I'd love to see or hear them. I...mostly like how things sit right now? But it doesn't feel like everything quite fits together yet. ^_^; [[User:RickScott|RickScott]] ([[User talk:RickScott|talk]]) 13:55, November 16, 2013 (UTC)
+
: If anyone has any ideas re organization & sections, I'd love to see or hear them. I...mostly like how things sit right now? But it doesn't feel like everything quite fits together yet. ^_^; [[User:RickScott|RickScott]] ([[User talk:RickScott|talk]]) 13:55, November 16, 2013 (UTC)
  +
  +
==Notes==
  +
  +
Just a few things I noticed but don't necessarily have an opinion on how to address ( already made quite a few edits about things I did feel I knew how to address):
  +
*"strategies (relatively) well known in feminism" seems a little off to me, making it sound like feminism is some sort of closed club. How about just "feminist tools, analyses, and strategies" or even "tools, analyses, and strategies that some feminists have developed"?
  +
*the phrase "geek women" appears several times, but perhaps some women in the audience for the wikis might like to identify as geeks, but don't feel they have "earned" the label (and perhaps are afraid they're actually [[Fake geek girls]].) Maybe at least one of the occurrences could acknowledge larval-stage geeks (maybe not in those exact words :-)
  +
*"explore other oppressions" makes it seem (to me) a little like sexism is getting portrayed as the main oppression and all other oppressions as secondary. Maybe just delete the word "other"?
  +
thanks again to those who have done the initial work on this page! [[User:Monadic|Monadic]] ([[User talk:Monadic|talk]]) 05:16, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:16, 22 November 2013

Notes from off-wiki discussion

Not all points by me:

  • one purpose of the wiki is to introduce geek women to tools, analysis and strategies (relatively) well known in feminism that can be useful to them
  • in scope: summaries of and feminist analysis/critique of anti-feminist viewpoints
  • out of scope: non/anti-feminist viewpoints not clearly marked as such and not accompanied by feminist critique
  • out of scope: non/anti-feminist viewpoints stated as if they are the editorial position of the wiki
  • "We do not maintain a neutral point of view; a feminist viewpoint being framed as the editorial point of view is specifically okay and encouraged; a non-feminist or anti-feminist viewpoint being framed as that is not okay"
  • Basically "our feminism will be intersectional or it will be bullshit", with credit to Flavia Dzodan
  • It's always very hard to draw the line around "geek", but maybe something about how we concentrate on feminist analysis of anything participants identify as "geeky" or "geek culture", rather than of all culture and society.
  • I also wonder if we should have explicit positions on a few things. Eg: we are not sympathetic to TERF viewpoints, we are not sympathetic to health or body policing (some people do see this as feminist), others?

Thayvian (talk) 04:50, November 15, 2013 (UTC)

I think I've now merged in the points above and everything I can recall from that discussion. And yes, imho we could definitely use more points re: what we consider consistent with our view of intersectional feminism.
If anyone has any ideas re organization & sections, I'd love to see or hear them. I...mostly like how things sit right now? But it doesn't feel like everything quite fits together yet. ^_^; RickScott (talk) 13:55, November 16, 2013 (UTC)

Notes

Just a few things I noticed but don't necessarily have an opinion on how to address ( already made quite a few edits about things I did feel I knew how to address):

  • "strategies (relatively) well known in feminism" seems a little off to me, making it sound like feminism is some sort of closed club. How about just "feminist tools, analyses, and strategies" or even "tools, analyses, and strategies that some feminists have developed"?
  • the phrase "geek women" appears several times, but perhaps some women in the audience for the wikis might like to identify as geeks, but don't feel they have "earned" the label (and perhaps are afraid they're actually Fake geek girls.) Maybe at least one of the occurrences could acknowledge larval-stage geeks (maybe not in those exact words :-)
  • "explore other oppressions" makes it seem (to me) a little like sexism is getting portrayed as the main oppression and all other oppressions as secondary. Maybe just delete the word "other"?

thanks again to those who have done the initial work on this page! Monadic (talk) 05:16, November 22, 2013 (UTC)