Group items tagged

GenderCC - women for climate justice, is the global network of women and gender activists, and gender experts from all world regions working for gender and climate justice. The platform began their collaboration with the UNFCCC during the COP9 in Milan in 2004. Since then the response to their efforts is increasing.

Local Contexts is a new forum for applying Traditional Knowledge licenses or labels to materials from Indigenous communities. They work a lot like Creative Commons licenses. There are often different categories of Indigenous knowledge meant only for the community, or only for women, or only for leaders, and these licenses offer a way to label materials accordingly. These labels and licenses are added onto existing copyright, which is often held by the person who made a tangible material rather than the community where the idea comes from (an anthropologist who filmed a traditional ceremony owns the copyright on the film, and the community has no copyright). These TK labels are asking people who come across materials like this to think about how they are using the materials, and to think about whose intellectual property they are. This is a very new initiative, but a really valuable tool. This is part of a different conversation that challenges how we normally talk about copyright and intellectual property.

Feminism's dullest mission.

It is true, there is still a big gap between what men and women do, specially at home. Most of the work at home such as buying meals, cleaning, ironing, etc... are done by women, even if they have a full time job.

"Progress has been made toward making academic research, knowledge, and resources accessible to the broader public. This is a great cause. It is certainly a matter of justice and equality. Ironically, a number of scholars - particularly those from marginalized communities themselves (women, people of color, LGBT people) - cannot or are hesitant to participate in the move toward open access. However, many scholars, particularly marginalized scholars, participate in a different form of open scholarship: intellectual activism. "

Very recent video that has gone viral - two indian girls fight back after being sexually harassed on the bus. This video has brought a lot of media attention from all over the world to the mistreatment of women. As a form of citizen journalism, this video went viral through social media and has since stirred up political and social debates online, creating a movement for change.

This is over a year old, but the archived lifestream should be fruitful with insights and skills.

"Larger than the Open Access warz, I feel that I have a moral responsibility to increase the access to science careers for women and minorities. I can't hold the door open for those folks unless I am standing on the other side of it. That means getting tenure and if someone tells me that I can get closer to those goals by forgoing Open Access for a round or two, I'm going to do it."

Emotional expression and linguistic style in online collaboration differ substantially depending on the contributors' gender and status, and on the communication network. This should be taken into account when analyzing collaborative success, and may prove insightful to communities facing gender gap and stagnation in contributor acquisition and participation levels.

lubajong and taylor_cole thank you for your comments. From my part I will add a critical evaluation of this resource as well. The talk pages of Wikipedia provide a rich source for researchers to study communication patterns. On Wikipedia talk pages they have found signals for status differences between groups of participants, notably between admins and ordinary contributors. Those findings support in general the theories of the researchers about status differences and communication style differences between managers and employees in firms. They have also found differences in communication style bases on gender, which also support their general theories about gender (which is a social construct). What I - as a Wikipedian insider - finds missing in the article is the selection bias. Wikipedia admins aren't appointed by Jimmy Wales or some other body. Admins are community selected. The exact process differs per language version. On the English Wikipedia admin selection is by a community consensus process. Future admins are selected who show the preferred communication style of admins by other contributors including existing admins. For me, the patterns in communication style do not explain the gender gap on Wikipedia. There is a gender gap in many language versions of Wikipedia, but not in all. The Armenian language version of Wikipedia is a notable exception, showing a gender balance in the conbtributor base. An explanation of that exemption requires further research. What taylor_cole notes about neutrality and bias is a valid point. People volunteer to write for Wikipedia, and volunteer in topic choice. My guess is that in general people will opt to write about something they like, care about, know about. A lack of diversity in contributors will naturally reflect in lack of diversity of topics. For example nerdy males will write about things male nerds like. In general females tend to be interested in other topics than nerdy males. A lack of topics covered in Wikipe

Levels of participation influences emotional expression and phrasing? has the function of sex and status of the taxpayer. 4 strands to study and find a result! Interesting!

Practical Action is an international development charity. We use sustainable technology to challenge poverty, working with poor women and men around the world. Open Knowledge if it can not be transformed into some development then, we don't need to advocate for it or our advocacy is fruitless

"Just as important as learning these helpful tools, however, is unlearning and avoiding the most common pitfalls of common sense. Reminding us of where society is most vulnerable to those, Sagan writes: In addition to teaching us what to do when evaluating a claim to knowledge, any good baloney detection kit must also teach us what not to do. It helps us recognize the most common and perilous fallacies of logic and rhetoric. Many good examples can be found in religion and politics, because their practitioners are so often obliged to justify two contradictory propositions.He admonishes against the twenty most common and perilous ones - many rooted in our chronic discomfort with ambiguity - with examples of each in action"

The 20 fallacies: "ad hominem - Latin for "to the man," attacking the arguer and not the argument (e.g., The Reverend Dr. Smith is a known Biblical fundamentalist, so her objections to evolution need not be taken seriously) argument from authority (e.g., President Richard Nixon should be re-elected because he has a secret plan to end the war in Southeast Asia - but because it was secret, there was no way for the electorate to evaluate it on its merits; the argument amounted to trusting him because he was President: a mistake, as it turned out) argument from adverse consequences (e.g., A God meting out punishment and reward must exist, because if He didn't, society would be much more lawless and dangerous - perhaps even ungovernable. Or: The defendant in a widely publicized murder trial must be found guilty; otherwise, it will be an encouragement for other men to murder their wives) appeal to ignorance - the claim that whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa (e.g., There is no compelling evidence that UFOs are not visiting the Earth; therefore UFOs exist - and there is intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe. Or: There may be seventy kazillion other worlds, but not one is known to have the moral advancement of the Earth, so we're still central to the Universe.) This impatience with ambiguity can be criticized in the phrase: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. special pleading, often to rescue a proposition in deep rhetorical trouble (e.g., How can a merciful God condemn future generations to torment because, against orders, one woman induced one man to eat an apple? Special plead: you don't understand the subtle Doctrine of Free Will. Or: How can there be an equally godlike Father, Son, and Holy Ghost in the same Person? Special plead: You don't understand the Divine Mystery of the Trinity. Or: How could God permit the followers of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - each in their own way enjoined to

Wonderful post, Kim! These are great guidelines alongside which to test ideas.

This article provides a brief historical contextualization of different forms of peer review. It does well to highlight not only pros and cons of the various processes, but it also discusses the positions from which these pros and cons come form. For example, gender is discussed, revealing that women frequently advocate for anonymous peer review due to the sexism they encounter leading to their work not being published. Another aspect that the authors engage with is how the technologies available shape the forms that peer review takes.