This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BrentNewland (talk | contribs) at 19:24, 10 February 2015 (→Removal of "By Whom", "Which", and "Citation Needed" tags: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 19:24, 10 February 2015 by BrentNewland (talk | contribs) (→Removal of "By Whom", "Which", and "Citation Needed" tags: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| Skip to table of contents |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Feminism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
 | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Feminism. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Feminism at the Reference desk. |
 | Feminism has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
 | This article lacks an infobox. You may wish to add one, so that the article resembles the standard display for this subject. This talk page may contain the banner of a relevant project, that provides the standardized infobox for this type of article. See also Category:Infobox templates, and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Infoboxes. |
|
References
|
 | By consensus, guideline, or policy Criticism about feminism is already covered with appropriate weight and sourcing. If you seek coverage beyond what you see, consider whether you are proposing content that is more suitable for other articles or for a non-Wikimedia website. If a criticism you wish to add lacks an adequate source, please find one first. Edits for other pages may be offered there, not here. Examples include content for specialized articles and Misplaced Pages policies, which have their own pages and their own talk pages. This is only an introductory article on feminism. To find specialized subarticles within feminism, please click on links in the feminism article, including in any sidebar. Feminism is inherently one-sided. Feminism is a critique of society. That means there is a disagreement between feminism and society. In that case, generally, if society is neutral, feminism is not. Misplaced Pages requires neutrality, but that applies to Misplaced Pages articles, not to feminism itself, nor to any source. As long as the article is neutral in how it presents its general subject, Misplaced Pages's requirement for neutrality is fulfilled. This article does not cover what feminism does not cover. If there are few feminist disagreements in a given society, feminism may have nothing to say about many subjects in that society. Misplaced Pages reports on feminism in accordance with reliable sources. Consistency with a particular political message is not this article's purpose. This article represents many sources with appropriate balance. While mainstream feminism is emphasized, other branches of feminism are also covered. The content of this article meets Misplaced Pages's Good Article Criteria. Content being added to this article must conform to the community's quality standards for "Good Articles". Material not meeting these criteria should be removed and rewritten appropriately to fit them. |
 | Points of interest related to Feminism on Misplaced Pages: History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Stubs – Assessment – To-do |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Feminism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
Semi-protected edit request on 13 November 2014
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Feminism is for the rights of BOTH and ALL sexes. NOT just women. It has "feminine" in the word as opposed to something else because most countries have always lived in a male dominant society. Feminists do not have the opinion that woman are better than men, or that we should live in a female dominant society. Feminists simply believe that all sexes should be equal and all given the same opportunity. The definition of a feminist is someone who believes in gender equality.
74.105.141.60 (talk) 04:49, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Stickee (talk) 04:59, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
paragraph from Feminism and equality article
The following was added to the Feminism and equality article, largely by Katelin09, and it does discuss equality, but I think it's too large in scope for that article, so I moved it to here for discussion, to see if any of it can be used in this article or elsewhere:
Many think that being a feminist is only a term for women to fall under. Truly the term feminist is a name anyone can follow as support for equality. With supporters of feminism it could help end oppression and cruel treatment against women and their fundamental rights. Over the years feminism has progressed to a new end with more equality, men supporters, and more women claiming to be a feminist. "There are still some tough issues keeping woman from capitalizing on the changes they are making". Some issues still keeping women from progression is the terms feminist are called, their image for how they are portrayed, and people not understanding the term feminism. It isn't easy living in a world where some don't let women or any gender live a normal life with the same rights as others. Equality is something each person should have. "Some people haven’t really come close enough to feminist movement to know what really happens, what it's really about". The truth is equality is not all about women's rights it also about helping others reach a content spot in their life to where they feel accepted.
The sources in the above are these, respectively: Rudman, Laurie. "Psychology of Women Quarterly 31.2". "The F Word: Is Feminism Incompatible With Beauty and Romance?": 125–36. Hooks, Bell (2000). Feminism Is for Everybody: Passionate Politics. Cambridge, MA: South End.
Thanks. Nick Levinson (talk) 22:40, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
References
- Rudman, Laurie. "Psychology of Women Quarterly 31.2". "The F Word: Is Feminism Incompatible With Beauty and Romance?": 125–36.
- Hooks, Bell (2000). Feminism Is for Everybody: Passionate Politics. Cambridge, MA: South End.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
- As it stands, although accurate, there are two major issues with the piece.
1) It is far too polemical for an encyclopedia
2) The grammar and syntax also require attention.
All in all this section is too much like an essay at the moment--Cailil 00:41, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2014
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
pornography http://search.proquest.com.lib-proxy.fullerton.edu/socabs/docview/60033852/C3C2453B70A4712PQ/2?accountid=9840 Haideecruz (talk) 19:01, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Not done: Request unclear. Please format your request in a "please change X to Y" format. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:08, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Capitalization of Bell Hooks?
Just wondering if we should capitalize the title of the author Bell Hooks, and her page? Not sure, haven't read too far into it.
"Feminism is mainly focused on women's issues, but author bell hooks and others have argued that, since feminism seeks gender equality, it must necessarily include men's liberation because men are also harmed by sexism and gender roles."
03:45, 6 January 2015 (UTC)Best Regards, m80s — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.10.228.60 (talk)
- Thanks for the question! No, bell hooks's name should not be capitalized because her pen name is spelled in lowercase. For more articles with this capitalization, see bell hooks and Ain't I a Woman? (book). It's not just a mass typo! :) BenLinus1214 20:57, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Why is there no criticism question? revisited
The answer: because there is nothing to criticize about feminism, apparently.
There are plenty of arguments against feminism in 2014, though I'd assume they would be labeled hate speech and inadmissible as valid criticism, because that's how totalitarian thought regimes work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.168.207.237 (talk) 15:28, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- The reason is because, per WP:CRITICISM, criticism sections are discouraged for all articles; instead of dividing everything into two or more squabbling viewpoints, articles are supposed to provide a single neutral perspective which touches on the various noteworthy opinions and strains of thought about the subject in their appropriate place. For instance, criticisms of individual threads of feminism are noted in several of the 'movements and ideologies' subsections; criticisms over different takes on sexuality are in the Feminism and sexuality section; criticisms of Feminist epistemology as it relates to science are noted in the Feminism and science section, and of course broad anti-feminism is mentioned at the bottom among responses. --Aquillion (talk) 01:57, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
- In addition, for an entire article on criticism of feminism, see the article Antifeminism. Per above, this article should not contain a criticism section per WP:CRITICISM. BenLinus1214 21:01, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
There's a Criticsm of Democracy page... Criticism of Socialism.. Criticism of Capitalism.. all *kinds* of Criticism pages and subsections. That *ANTIFEMINISM* is considered Criticism of Feminism is ridiculous in the extreme, especially since the Antifeminism page is almost exclusively populated with quotes by FEMINISTS. It's like saying Judaism is the Criticism of Naziism, and then populating the Jewish article with endless quotes from Nazis. It's nonsensical in the extreme. Criticism of Capitalism, for example, doesn't link to Communism.... Criticism for Liberalism doesn't link to Conservativism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.180.180.106 (talk) 18:31, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- If you think Misplaced Pages needs a new article on a certain topic that isn't covered elsewhere in the encyclopaedia or need more in-depth coverage, create it. --TS 01:06, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Don't you think I've tried? They just delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.180.180.106 (talk) 13:48, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- Maybe I have misunderstood what you're saying, maybe I'm misunderstanding the page logs, but I find no record of the page Criticism of feminism being deleted. --TS 14:18, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- This whole thing is toeing the line of WP:NOTFORUM. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 17:50, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- Certainly at this point it appears to have veered off topic. --TS 02:48, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
- This whole thing is toeing the line of WP:NOTFORUM. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 17:50, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Opening should be altered to match Men's Rights Movement restrictions
From the Men's Rights Movement article: "The men's rights movement is made up of a variety of groups and individuals who are commonly concerned about what they consider to be issues of male disadvantage and discrimination."
Per discussions here and here. It seems to me the Feminism and Men's Right Movements should be held to the same standards. If Misplaced Pages insists on having "what they CONSIDER to be" on that article, it should be present here as well.
Places it could be inserted:
"Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve what they consider to be equal political, economic, cultural, personal, and social rights for women.
This includes seeking to establish what they consider to be equal opportunities for women in education and employment.
A feminist generally self-defines as advocating for or supporting what they consider to be the rights and equality of women.
Feminist advocacy is mainly focused on what they consider to be women's rights, but author bell hooks, among others, argue for the necessity for it to include men's liberation, because men are also harmed by traditional gender roles."
Per the linked discussion :Articles are not supposed to endorse views, whether those of feminists, LGBT rights groups, anti-racism groups, pro-racism groups, etc., and there is no reason to make an exception here. If the Men's Rights Movement article is written in a way that does not endorse anything about the Men's Rights Movement, so should the Feminism article not endorse these viewpoints listed above. BrentNewland (talk) 18:19, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- The sources don't treat them the same, so the article don't either. RS by and large to not question the veracity of the feminist claim of gender inequality. That's not true for MRM. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:35, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- The *only* criteria here for assessing how this article opens are a) verifiability: how the subject is treated by reliable sources b) Neutral point of view: the recording without intervention of how the mainstream scholarly material treats the subject, giving time, space and weight in accordance with the reliability of those sources and c) Recording what the article contains.
The issues with other articles belong on their talk page. What this page deals with is what happens on Feminism not at Men's rights movement.
It is absolutely not the job of wikipedia to neuter sources. It is not our job to alter what they say to fit subjective misconceptions of "objectivity". Doing so constitutes original research at best and at worst misrepresentation of sources - something that has been attempted here on a number of occasions. You should also be aware that the Men's rights movement topic area is under probation and behaviour on this site in relation to tha topic area is monitored by sysops - there is some good advice here on what is unacceptable behaviour and how to avoid it.
As it stands this thread is wildly off-topic and will be closed if it continues to veer into the use of this site as a forum--Cailil 19:02, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Removal of "By Whom", "Which", and "Citation Needed" tags
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Feminism&oldid=646534042&diff=prev
I believe all of these "By Whom" and "Citation needed" tags I added (a total of four) are completely justified. The lede makes claims that are not cited, despite copious amounts of citations in the lede.
"Feminist campaigns are generally considered to be main force behind major historical societal changes , particularly in the West, where they are near-universally credited "
First: "Generally considered" is, as I understand it, a phrase frowned upon by Misplaced Pages. It's quite literally a generalization, which has no place here. I believe this tag is valid, because that particular bit needs reworded. It should include some specific names of notable people or organizations who hold this view.
Changing the "are generally considered to be" to something like "have been attributed to be" with a few citations linking to articles that support that claim would be far better.
Second: "Main force behind major historical societal changes" is a MASSIVE claim - and completely nonspecific. WHAT, specifically, are the major historical changes made by the feminism movement? As far as I know, this line is claiming that Feminism is the main force behind EVERY major historical societal change. What is the level considered "major"? Who has decided what is and is not "major"" historical societal changes? Who is claiming they are the "main force"? Also, that line is missing a "the". THE main force, not "to be main force".
Changing "main force behind major historical societal changes" to something like "a driving force behind several historically significant societal changes" solves a lot of issues, but it still needs to specify which ones.
Third: "where they are NEAR-UNIVERSALLY credited" - Honestly, I can't see any justification for this wording. Just like "generally considered", there is absolutely nothing to back up or clarify this statement, and it's a generalization.
"Feminists have also advocated for workplace rights, including receiving the right to paid work, paid maternity leave, and eradicating all forms of discrimination against women."
Each one of these claims could easily have a citation. I'm sure there are plenty of sources. BrentNewland (talk) 19:24, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Categories:- Misplaced Pages good articles
- Social sciences and society good articles
- Old requests for peer review
- All unassessed articles
- GA-Class Gender studies articles
- High-importance Gender studies articles
- Gender studies articles needing infoboxes
- WikiProject Gender studies articles
- GA-Class Feminism articles
- Top-importance Feminism articles
- WikiProject Feminism articles
- GA-Class Discrimination articles
- High-importance Discrimination articles
- WikiProject Discrimination articles
- GA-Class sociology articles
- High-importance sociology articles
- GA-Class social movements task force articles
- Social movements task force articles
- GA-Class Philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Philosophy articles
- GA-Class social and political philosophy articles
- Mid-importance social and political philosophy articles
- Social and political philosophy task force articles
- GA-Class politics articles
- High-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- GA-Class Religion articles
- Top-importance Religion articles
- WikiProject Religion articles
- GA-Class Men's Issues articles
- High-importance Men's Issues articles
- WikiProject Men's Issues articles
- Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists