3 ms·
In regards to the Wikipedia list of American Novelists, could it not be that sexism for the last many hundreds of years have rendered a collection of what many
by sdoowpilihp 13y ago
In regards to the Wikipedia list of American Novelists, could it not be that sexism for the last many hundreds of years have rendered a collection of what many consider to be the "most prominent authors" being primarily male. I am not saying that it's right, but it would seem that given our propensity as a culture through the years to over value the opinion of a man, a list of mainly male authors is all but inevitable.
- Fomite 13y ago"History did it" is never a good reason to support marginalization. Especially when there are other, more neutral ways to split up "American Novelists".
- narwally 13y agoI don't think sdoowpilihp said anything about supporting marginalization. It was just simply pointed out that the chosen hierarchy of the Wikipedia page could be seen as a cultural artifact of centuries of sexism.
- plorkyeran 13y agoIt's not a list of the "most prominent authors"; it's a list of all American Novelists. In addition, it was not being turned into a list of "mainly male authors"; it was being turned into a list of only male authors.
- sdoowpilihp 13y agoYou are arguing in hyperbole. If you were to include every american author to have ever lived, the list would be untenable. There has to be a logical cut off, and often in the world of the arts, that cut off is directly correlated to prominence as an artist.
- porroseduto 13y agoOr it could simply mean that there are more great male writers than female ones.
- sdoowpilihp 13y agothat's a preposterous statement. I challenge you to support your claim.
- jack-r-abbit 13y agoI think the point was that all the women were being moved to the "American Women Novelist" sub-list while all the men remained in the "American Novelist" top list. If they had moved all the men into one just for men also and then made the top level list just link to the two sub lists that would have made more sense. This would also open up a format for additional sub lists linked from the top list.
- chris_mahan 13y agoWhat about transgendered authors? What about authors who write with a nom-de-plume of a different gender?
- jack-r-abbit 13y agoright... didn't I say that opens up a format for more sub lists?
- pasquinelli 13y agoin any event it's not a very sensible way of dividing that group. afaict there are three genera that you could use as the intension of the individuals in the sublists. you have (american)(people)who wrote(novels). taking an attribute of the (people) as the differentia makes as much sense as dividing the list by american state. dividing them by the kinds of novels they wrote would make more sense, because the writing novels thing is certainly more what the list is about than the writer's genitals. but i'm not a wikipedian.