If humour offend people then the problem is not with people feeling
offended.

Humour is often based on common understanding and common background between
the person making a joke.
I can joke with really good friend making irony and derision about things
that are in my values, they know it and will get the irony.
I should not do that to a wider audience (they won't get it, and I have lot
of chances to offend people).

We may err sometimes and still offend people by making something we think
is humour, when told I see no other good path than presenting excuses.

I'm seriously disappointed to see such piece published in the Wikipedia
SignPost.

Le mer. 6 mars 2019 à 09:53, Fæ <[email protected]> a écrit :

> It is an old story, artists and authors using humour and parody that
> they genuinely believed was an observation, not an attack on anyone.
> That a comedian or an author had good intentions, or the trope that
> complainers "need to get a sense of humour", does not stop us knowing
> that the promotion of stereotypes or other marginalization of a
> minority, causes actual harm, real distress, and for the targeted
> group there are long term consequences that come from having less self
> worth.
>
> Peter, history is against you and it always has been. It does not take
> long browsing Wikipedia to understand why we all need to stand up and
> callout thoughtless jokes and bad stereotypes, rather than being
> intimidated by free speech fallacious arguments that claim "it is your
> fault for looking at it". I suggest reflecting over how blackface
> minstrelsy was defended as harmless and hilarious fun that persisted
> for well over a hundred years, or in this century how parodies about
> trans people that were considered harmless twenty years ago, are
> correctly called abusive now.[1][2] I'm not even going to touch what
> we can learn from "parody" in the 1930s.
>
> Good faith is superduper, we should avoid presuming bad intentions,
> especially if a first mistake that will not be repeated. This does not
> stop us Wikipedians having a shared duty to ensure that through our
> website we are not complicit in creating bad outcomes. Seriously who
> disagrees with that, and if this is what you mean by "political
> purposes to push an agenda", sure please join us and sign up to our
> open knowledge agenda.
>
> Comedian Kumail Nanjiani, "Comedians making transphobic jokes: What
> side do you wanna be on?"
>
> Links
> 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minstrel_show
> 2.
> https://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=12115577
>
> Fae
> --
> [email protected] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> Wikimedia LGBT+ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
>
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 07:26, Peter Southwood
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Natasha,
> > I seldom rush to be the first to express an opinion. It may be that this
> humour has deeply affected some people, but it is my considered opinion
> that they have jumped to a conclusion without due reflection themselves.
> Accusing a person with no known history of baiting people for their gender
> identification of doing just that, when they tried to make it clear that
> that was not their intention within the constraints of not over-explaining
> a joke, seems like attempting to use the article for political purposes to
> push an agenda for special use of terminology on Wikipedia which is not
> used by reliable sources by claiming extreme outrage. Maybe I am wrong, but
> that is what it looks like to me. I can imagine other alternatives too, and
> they are even worse.
> > As far as I am aware, we are having the conversation freely, so yes, by
> all means.
> > The "joked about party" can express what they feel about such "jokes",
> and are doing so to the extent that they appear to consider it quite OK to
> assume that their assumption that they are the target of the jokes is true
> because they choose to take it that way, and that the word of the author is
> irrelevant, and that it is perfectly acceptable to harass someone because
> they chose to be offended. This may be happening with others who do not
> feel personally targeted too, but I don’t know what  their reasoning is.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf Of Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l
> > Sent: 05 March 2019 16:12
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Use of Wikimedia projects for anti-LGBT+
> "humour"
> >
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > Please take time to reflect that this humour has deeply affected some
> people (and not only the persons who outed publicly taking risks), hence
> the reaction. To those who do not understand how LGBTIQ people feel about
> jokes on their identity and the legitimate desire that adequate language be
> used to express it might just seem superfluous and look like an
> overreaction, but it does echo a deep suffering which takes place after
> being joked about virtually everywhere and not being able to express
> opinion when on the otherside, freedom of speech is invoked to promote such
> jokes. Advocates of freedom of speech do not try to silence opinions.
> > Just look at what happened recently in France around the Ligue du lol
> affair, and maybe you will understand what is at stake here (1).
> >
> > Jokes are not bad in themselves, they become problematic when they
> systematically target the same group of people (women, LGBTIQ  people,
> minorities ect...) , and when they are issued systematically by the same
> group of people not aware of their own priviledge, and when they are
> disseminated through official channels. They can pave the way to
> problematic behaviors if the « joked about party » cannot in turn express
> freely what they feel about these jokes.
> > I have a request : can we have the conversation freely?
> > This is in no way underevaluating the value of the Signpost and the
> remarkable work done by people like you.
> > Maybe more articles on the subject of harassement and gender issues are
> needed in the Signpost to adress this issue, to lay down the cards, and
> maybe not in humour tone.
> > To finish  I want to thank Barbara  from the bottom of my heart  for
> showing willingness to apologize and understand (because the effect of this
> is soothing and shows willingness to understand) and I thank Fae for
> speaking out.
> > If all protagonists could now calm down and consider that the very fact
> the conversation is taking place is positive, I think we would all have
> gained in freedom of speech.
> >
> > Good afternoon,
> >
> > Nattes à chat
> >
> > (1)
> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/12/world/europe/la-ligue-du-lol-sexual-harassment.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Le 5 mars 2019 à 10:07, Peter Southwood <[email protected]>
> a écrit :
> > >
> > > "When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout."
> > > Overreacting is a tradition at Wikipedia.
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf Of Michel Vuijlsteke
> > > Sent: 03 March 2019 19:49
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Use of Wikimedia projects for anti-LGBT+
> "humour"
> > >
> > > I don't understand in which possible world anyone thought this was a
> good
> > > idea.
> > >
> > > The MfD, that is. It, and the entire discussion in favour, reads as
> some
> > > sort of caricature of the worst SJW-type excesses.
> > >
> > > M.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> On Sun, 3 Mar 2019 at 16:41, Fæ <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> As the last second repost had the same format error, I am trying for a
> > >> final time. How embarrassing!
> > >>
> > >> ****
> > >>
> > >> I would like to apologise to SMcCandlish and Barbara (WVS), and more
> > >> generally to the Wikipedia community, for any possible implication
> > >> given in my previous email to this list, that authors of the
> > >> problematic Signpost "Pronouns beware" essay, might in any way be
> > >> thought to be transphobic. This was an important matter to word
> > >> precisely and accurately. I take responsibility and apologise, it was
> > >> stupid of me to fail to ensure that there could be no way that my
> > >> words might appear to be intended as an attack on the person, rather
> > >> than criticism of the judgement used when writing this essay, and the
> > >> choice to publish it on Wikipedia.
> > >>
> > >> I refrained from correcting this email previously, as it was thought
> > >> to be better to avoid stirring up any further drama, however this was
> > >> being interpreted by one of the authors as deliberately avoiding
> > >> making any correction.[1] I apologise for that misjudgement, and my
> > >> failure to understand how a delay would appear. My thanks go to
> > >> SMcCandlish for raising their complaint that a correction was needed.
> > >>
> > >> The rest of this email runs on the long side, if you have been
> > >> following the deletion discussion, there is probably nothing new here.
> > >> :-)
> > >>
> > >> My action in acting transparently as a whistleblower, was to criticise
> > >> the editorial judgement of creating an essay which made jokes about
> > >> pronoun usage which would, and has, been read as making a bad joke
> > >> that mocks genderqueer and transgender people. This problem of how the
> > >> article could be read, was raised by others before publication.
> > >> Overwhelmingly the deletion discussion created for the essay has had
> > >> feedback from many long term and experienced Wikipedians who were
> > >> alarmed and upset that the article was published without this problem
> > >> being acted on, and either halting publication, or ensuring a
> > >> resubmission so there could be no confusion that the article appeared
> > >> abusive or a failure to respect genderqueer and nonbinary people.[0]
> > >> Many deletion comments have called the article "transphobic". Nobody
> > >> as far as I have seen, has mistakenly called the authors transphobes.
> > >> There is a good faith presumption that cause is an error of judgement.
> > >> It has been explained several times by myself and others in related
> > >> Wikipedia discussions that objecting to a published joke being
> > >> offensive to a minority group, in no way implies or presumes that the
> > >> author(s) deliberately intended to cause offense to that minority
> > >> group.Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> Thankfully the Signpost essay has been hidden from view while the
> > >> deletion discussion continues, an action that resolves the immediate
> > >> issue, and removes any need for me to be involved.
> > >>
> > >> I have not made a complaint to the Technical Spaces Code of Conduct
> > >> Committee, and decided to let a thread on meta stay closed with regard
> > >> to use of a unpaid volunteer WMF related title that requires
> > >> compliance with the Code of Conduct.
> > >>
> > >> I sent a friendly confidential email to the Wikimedia Wiki Education
> > >> project for comment, as Barbara chose to publish the essay using the
> > >> unpaid volunteer account that specifically represented Wiki Education,
> > >> though again, this was not a formal complaint. I had one informal
> > >> reply back saying they were looking into it. I have not emailed anyone
> > >> else with regard to the authors or their actions. Explicitly, I have
> > >> not contacted anyone's employer nor anyone else not directly part of
> > >> Wikimedia projects.
> > >>
> > >> Barbara has thoughtfully stated in a personal email to me, and on her
> > >> Wikipedia talk page, that she is preparing a formal apology as one of
> > >> the coauthors.
> > >>
> > >> Thankfully SMcCandlish has agreed with the article being hidden from
> > >> view, and continues to debate the article deletion. They chose to
> > >> raised an ANI request against me for "canvassing and
> > >> incivility/aspersions in gender-related disputes", which was closed
> > >> without action toThanks,day.[3] At the time of writing this email,
> there
> > >> are
> > >> claims by SMcCandlish that they are "accused of being a transphobe",
> > >> it is unclear who is doing this.[4]
> > >>
> > >> The WMF have taken the unusual step of refusing an email promoting the
> > >> Signpost on the announcements list, due to "multiple reports of
> > >> concerns related to potentially harmful content in the February 2019
> > >> edition of the Signpost". I made no formal email complaint to the WMF
> > >> about Signpost, or anything else. The multiple reports were from other
> > >> concerned people that are unknown to me. Sadly the immediate personal
> > >> response to the WMF by the Signpost Production Manager has been "I
> > >> find your rejection of my email to be an empty political gesture
> > >> bowing to political pressure from braying sheeple."[5] No other
> > >> Signpost contributor has made any other reply, either personally or on
> > >> behalf of Signpost. I have seen no plans or proposals to change or
> > >> improve the review process or policies for the Signpost.
> > >>
> > >> Thank you for those sending private messages of encouragement, support
> > >> and information. Should anything similar happen on Wikipedia in the
> > >> future, this experience has taught me to run as fast as possible in
> > >> the opposite direction, rather than putting my head above the parapet.
> > >> Becoming a figure of hatred is not worth the stress, or having to read
> > >> targeted mockery wrapped as "jokes", published on the project you love
> > >> and support. Throughout our Wikimedia projects, there remains huge
> > >> room for improvement in how best to ensure correct, friendly and
> > >> respectful treatment of minorities, especially us queers.
> > >>
> > >> Links
> > >> 0.
> > >>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2019-02-28/Humour
> > >> 1.
> > >>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&type=revision&diff=885937612&oldid=885936723
> > >> 2. https://enThanks,.
> > >> wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_Signpost/2019-02-28
> > >> 3.
> > >>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&type=revision&diff=885954601&oldid=885953822
> > >> 4.
> > >>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2019-02-28/Humour&curid=60098422&diff=885957940&oldid=885957573
> > >> 5.
> > >>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_Signpost/2019-02-28
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Fae
> > >> --
> > >> [email protected] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > >> Wikimedia LGBT+ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>



-- 
Pierre-Selim
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to