The Great Wikipedia Sexism Scandal Continues

by Robert VerBruggen

After rattling off a number of disparities in the modern writing world that are supposed to be shocking but are really just funny (“women have opinions, but some 80% of published op/ed pieces have male names in the bylines”), Barbara Fister laments the fact that more men than women write Wikipedia articles for free, and sees dire implications for society:

I’m not sure what the underlying causes are, but when an information source that is consulted by countless information-seekers daily has such demonstrable biases, we have a problem. And when so many people deny we have a problem . . . well, that’s a problem, too.

Unlike higher ed, Wikipedia has no application process at all, and therefore no application process it can pervert to engineer demographic outcomes. So, if its effort to recruit more women to write without being paid fails, should it cap the number of males? Or will the Left grow up and admit that in a free society, it’s not a problem every time we see an inequality of outcome among groups?