These data points don’t have much context. Why don’t you do something about that?

This is not a wiki. I’m not interested in context. I’m interested in providing accurate, easily searchable facts that can be used by others for their own purposes (ideally, to create context for others). That is the extent of MrArchivist.com’s mission.

This database does, however, provide links to the original sources as often as possible. These citations are where context can be obtained. I highly recommend that everyone feel confident with their sources before citing any piece of info. It makes for greater internal equanimity during debates, I find.


These data points are pretty one-sided. Why don’t you do something about that?

When a scale is imbalanced, it is prudent to add weight to only one side if what you’re trying to achieve is equality.

I’m not necessarily of the opinion that the scale of gendered problems is imbalanced. However, I am certain that the issue of information about gendered problems is. As this is a site about providing information, I consider it most ethical to add to the least represented side for the forseeable future.


This database focuses mainly on the West. Why is that?

I believe that the main problems that people have with post-modern, first-world feminism is its focus on first-world non-issues (see: Shirtstorm, Ban Bossy, the non-discriminatory gender earnings gap, etc.). And the only way to manufacture an issue out of a non-issue is to obscure, distort, and fabricate facts. Thus, as the majority of the misinformation out there is in regards to the “oppression” of women in the West, the majority of items to combat this information will necessarily focus on the West as well.

If the majority of first-world feminists focused on true discrimination against women (which does exist, though almost entirely in the second- and third-world) instead on localized, perceived slights and man-bashing, then I’d probably identify as a feminist and this website wouldn’t exist in the first place. Alas, that is not the case and here we are.


This database is obnoxiously Anglo-centric.

There’s no explicit question there, but I’ll bite. I am an American, and English is one of my only 2 spoken languages. As this database started out for personal use, it makes sense that I tended to focus on English-speaking sources. And, typically, the source in which a language is written tends to concern places wherein that language is primarily spoken. This is not an excuse, but it is a reason (two things which are all-too-often conflated).

That reason being given, I am thrilled to include data about extra-anglo nations. There is only one catch: the primary source (or reliable secondary source) still needs to be in English (I will also accept Romanian and Ancient Greek). This is because I check every data point that goes into the database personally, and my reading comprehension is limited beyond those languages.

In an ideal world, there are more options than (1) accuracy (with offense taken) and (2) inaccuracy (with everyone feeling warm and included). However, if those are my only choices, I’m going with Option (1).


I’d like to add something to the database. How do I do that?

Clickity click. Please follow the guidelines listed and be as thorough as possible.


You’re wrong about something/everything. How do I change it?

Well, changing me being wrong about something is quite a complex process.

However, changing the MrArchivist.com database is a lot more straightforward. Simply go here and submit your input under “Other Notes” or “Objections.” If I have mistaken, misinterpreted, or misrepresented a particular source, please include the item number in your submission.


OK, I just submitted my correction. Now that I’ve soundly proven you your fact wrong, will you get rid of it?

Yes and no. If a fact or source is thoroughly discredited, then I will remove it from the main database and add it to a “Do Not Use” page. That way, people will be aware to avoid that source in the future. After all, knowing what not to say is just as valuable as knowing what to say, don’t you think?

However, in order to move a fact to the DNU database, it has to be soundly stomped. If what you offer, instead, is an interesting counterpoint or a different perspective on the posted interpretation of the data, then your submission will be added to the Objections section of the appropriate data.


Who made that killer logo and banner of yours? It’s fantastic!

Well, as of right now, I don’t have a killer logo or banner. I have some ideas, but my strengths lie far outside of graphic design. I’m working on it, though. Stay tuned.