Wikipediocracy’s locker room values

Once again, it’s time to play “Wikipediocracy’s locker room values”.

In our last episode, newly minted Executive Director Katherine Maher had just tweeted from the Wikimedia conference in San Diego:

Tartan bras?  Ewww.

A little later, the mystery was solved by none other than Wikipediocracy’s main moderator and pond scum, Zoloft/William Burns, who just happened to be at the same conference, checking out the tartan bras.

At the Tilted Kilt you can meet all kinds of scantily clad women wearing tartan bras who have online profiles written in gushy monosyllables and are just dying to be your newest BFF.

So what are the woman-bashing Wikipediocrazies up to now?

They have adopted a street waif named Graaf from the Netherlands, a self-described old white hippy with no education, who has spent the last few months since his global ban making the rounds of the criticism sites, lambasting women for some unintelligible thing about the “gender gab”.  In particular, he is fixated on the personal appearance of Katherine Maher, and on someone in the Netherlands named Moira. Graaf should fit right in with Wikipediocracy.

Recently though, Graaf had a little run-in with the only woman who is currently active on the site, a visiting crank named Brill Lyle.  Now Wikipediocracy doesn’t usually tolerate women, but they will make a temporary exception for certain kinds of women:– ditsy women, women who are sexually ambiguous, and bizarrely aggressive women with macho avatars. For the moment at least, they find Brill Lyle amusing and after Graf’s latest outburst they were even willing to put him on ice for a few hours, as a token gesture, even if he was quickly unmuted.

3 graaf rant on wo

Kui Kinyanjui (r)

The run-in centered around the newly hired WMF Vice president of Communications from Kenya, Kui Kinyanjui, and as is their habit, the Wikipediocrazies proceeded to make all kinds of comments and assumptions about her without bothering to google her profile, as they would a man.  But even the cranky Brill Lyle is not that dense, and provided a little reality check by posting the search links.  Whereupon the Graaf launched on this cringeworthy tirade:

“and do you really thing I don’t understand why [the WMF] hire suddenly some femal (sic) communication person for there (sic) contacts with press? To shake a bit with here (sic) “female parts”?  or to flirt a bit like Maher did with that journalist with here (sic) in practice is everything possible? Or with here (sic) sexy outfit with here Fact Checkers bull on that stage?”

2 graaf rant on wo closeup

So the idea of accusing a women with perfectly adequate qualifications of being hired for men to stare at her body must have been too much for even the sleazy tartan-bra-ogling Zoloft?  Who immediately noted it and objected to the blatant misogyny?

Aha ha ha ha.  No.

It was the “bone in nose” comment.
1 graf mute bone nose wo

So trashing a professional woman, a new WMF staffer, for no reason at all other than being born female, is just fine, as long as you don’t go all Africa on her. Whatever.

And what about Maher’s attire, that Graaf finds so transgressive?

She has expensive taste, to be sure, but no more than any other ED.  That’s how they are supposed to dress, up there in the rarefied atmosphere of the C-suite.

And the “flirtatious manner”?  Judge for yourself, doesn’t float my boat, but I doubt if they are going to put Jimbo up there in a speedo just for me. Here is the whole video.

Note: Just to be perfectly clear, I have no desire to see Jimbo in any scantily clad attire whatsoever, that was just to show the ridiculousness of Graaf’s comments. Jimbo is just fine, dressed exactly the way he is, just Jimbo being Jimbo.


18 thoughts on “Wikipediocracy’s locker room values

  1. In spite of Jimbo’s penchant for showing up at events dressed in the t-shirt du jour, which is not particularly flattering to someone in their early 50’s, you have to admit he does clean up very nicely. As far as accessories, he does display some eccentricity in shoes. You can see at his wedding they got him into highly polished dress shoes, but in the last photo I think I’m seeing brown shoes, very scruffy. This type of eccentricity would be much less tolerated in a woman. Also, is that a Mac? Not taking any sides in the Mac/Windows thing, just pointing it out.

  2. It was mentioned on Wikipediocrazy. Pity you can’t read, but this posting this quotes are total out of it’s context, written by someone who has no idea what is going on. I am indeed that old, uneducated hippie, who fought side by side with women for their rights in the seventies. With as result Holland is one of the most emancipated country’s in the world. And for your information, in Holland we don’t discrimnate black people. The one who wrote this might be high educated, but can just read and don’t know what real feminism is. That’s all. Best, Graaf Statler

  3. I am really sorry, but I think it’s very wrong to start a discussion about the position of the women in Africa and mansplanning in the commons of a blog, because someone took two quotes out of complex discussion on Wikipediocrazy and came to all kinds of conclusions. You and others are kindly invited to discuss whatever you want with me and others on Wikipediocrazy, Wikipedia Sucks or wikipedia Review. Because the discussion is already spread over this fora. Best, Graaf Statler

  4. Graaf: Genderdesk can read and hasn’t cited your greatest excesses concerning women (maybe in earlier posts, I don’t know). You haven’t been overly kind when talking about K Maher in particular. You do not know her (she’s never written back to you any more than she did to me). Perhaps neither BrillLyle nor Genderdesk have ever written to Katherine Maher, who knows? perhaps they have? What would that tell us? As BrillLyle noticed… crank is a pretty good word (it can apply to you, to her, to me, to anything a bit bent, …)

  5. No, I was not friendly about K Maher. And I have every reason not to be, it is a pity you can’t read Dutch otherwise you understood why. And that has nothing to do with the fact she is a woman or not, I consider here as complete incompetent. But, again, I don’t think this is the place to discuss this. I simple don’t want to be kind to madam Maher. I don’t have any reason to be kind to madam Maher. Why should I?

  6. By the way, they forget to quote my remark why for the hell a organisation who never answer any email need a communication employer, And, if someone not know who and what Moira is, it’s better not to mention her name. Good night, it’s late were street waif is living. Let’s say we are equal.

  7. Well I don’t know what to say. Thank you Graaf for trying to talk about this here. I think you are very sincere.

    Sorry, but I will not be discussing this in another place, for one thing, because this happened. Oh and this:

    I can’t read the Dutch at all, his blog does not make any sense, but I am getting a very very bad feeling from Graaf. First he keeps saying “it’s not because she’s a woman, it’s not because she’s a women”. But he never gives a different reason, or any reason at all. So in the end, you have to think that it *is* about being a woman. Because he never talks about any of the men that way, what they are wearing, whether they are attractive, whether they smile, And he doesn’t know these women at all, and still he wants to talk about “shake a bit” and “female parts” as if he expected they want to be intimate with him. They are professionals. They studied a long time to learn their field, and even more time getting work experience. At at the same time they had to worry about men saying they were too ugly, too attractive, should smile more, were smiling too much, etc etc etc. Men don’t have to take those questions, and it is very ugly to do that to women.

    But is is 3 am in the Netherlands, maybe Graaf wants to sleep. If you like, I can close the thread for a while.

  8. Okay I see Graaf posted again while I was typing. I will close the thread for at least 12 hours. But I really don’t see a good reason for the discussion at this point.

  9. Okay I have opened the thread again, but just for transparency, Graaf is now moderated, which means I look at his comments before I let them through. It is not fair to other people who might want to comment to keep it closed just because of him. The stuff I object to is 1) linking to sites that dox 2) flaming specifically named WMF employees and volunteers, as opposed to criticism that has been reasoned out. 3) off-topic spamming, but mostly because 4) he does not seem to understand what I write. For instance, his blog is in Dutch, but because I do not read Dutch, he thinks I cannot read at all. If I did not know how to read, how could I write a blog post? This is more than a language barrier, but I don’t know what it is. He says he has dyslexia, maybe that is it, that he cannot read something and comprehend it. So now I feel bad, because I think he is sincere, but this is too much for me, and I don’t know what else to do.

  10. The continued spam and emails…sigh…no, just can’t do it. I have made it so I don’t see Graaf’s comments anymore. If he makes a comment here, it will automatically go in the trash. Graaf has found a home on Wikipediocracy, let him stay there. If I write something here about him, I will give him a chance to reply, but other than that, I think he needs to stay on the other blogs.

  11. The users from the Gendergap are extremely activist. They no longer even work on the “gender gap” between men and women. They want recognition for their feminine superiority, that’s all. Nothing to do with feminism. It’s completly derailed on NLwiki. The scandals from “would be femenists” are rising quickly.

  12. To the people from Belgium or the Netherlands or whatever who keep trying to post unsourced accusations about the leadership and women of the Netherlands chapter on this thread: no I will not print that. If you want to write about that, write it on your own blog.

    Thread closed.

Comments are closed.