Talk for Article "Sexual politics confront modern sexual etiquette"

Talk about this Article

  1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    “…feminist website Jezebel said in a critique of the Babe report that has been praised for articulating how the story was mishandled.”

    I think you need to say who praised it.

    1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

      Thanks Martin, will include a citation.

  2. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    I thought this article
    https://jezebel.com/babe-what-are-you-doing-1822114753

    made a good point about the quality of the reporting.

    “Because of the amateurish way the Babe report was handled (her wine choices; her outfit), and the way it was written with an almost prurient and unnecessarily macabre interest in the minute details of their interaction (“the claw”), it left the subject open to further attacks, the kind that are entirely, exhaustingly predictable.”

    As I see it, the WikiTribune mission is all about raising the quality of reporting. I think you should take the story further.

    (Calling it a “minefield” diminishes the importance of the heightened awareness because it suggests that there’s hidden dangers for men and that isn’t the case.)

    1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

      Hey Mason. I read the Jezebel piece and it was in my first draft of this story. I have added a paragraph on the reporting surrounding the Babe piece and a link to the Jezebel piece to, as you say, take the story further. It would be great if you wanted to come in and edit too, if you think there is still even more to be said – which I predict is the case!

      1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

        Hello Lydia, thank you for your article. It’s the first one I read since joining just a few minutes ago, after getting the WT backer’s email reminder.

        I mainly wanted to post here in Talk to say I am really pleased with the neutral language used in your article, and came away with a sense of a balanced look at the emerging story.

        Do you know what the criteria will be for removing the Emerging Story headers and footers? I understand in the early days of the WT there will be quite a lot of cautionary use of the tags, but I wonder if some stories might linger in emergent status overlong as the site grows.

        1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

          Hi Stephen, thanks very much for your comment and good to hear you’ve joined as a WT user.

          We’re still experimenting so there is no official criteria on how long an emerging story is. But we are definitely having an ongoing discussion about emerging status, and when to put a story to bed. If you had any ideas we’d love to hear them.

      2. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

        I don’t feel qualified to contribute, mostly because I’m confused about the coverage of these stories. For example, this Reuters article says that “a backlash is underway”. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-misconduct-metoo/growing-pains-for-metoo-as-ansari-tale-sparks-backlash-talk-idUSKBN1F72RA

        If two people agree about Weinstein but disagree about Ansari, they both have consistent positions. Why is that disagreement a “backlash”? And why is the conversation presented as if it was internal discord?

        1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

          I mean to say that I consider that clickbait, but it’s Reuters but on the other hand it’s entertainment news but on the other hand it still doesn’t make any sense.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Be the first to collaborate on our developing articles

WikiTribune Open menu Close Search Like Back Next Open menu Close menu Play video RSS Feed Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Follow us on Instagram Follow us on Youtube Connect with us on Linkedin Connect with us on Discord Email us