Jump to content

Talk:Violence against men: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
mNo edit summary
Restored revision 1221517906 by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk): WP:NOTFORUM/WP:TALK
 
(79 intermediate revisions by 24 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|archive_age=60|archive_units=days|archive_bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}}
{{Talk header|noarchives=yes|search=no}}
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|gg}}
{{Vital article|topic=Society|level=5|class=C}}
{{Old XfD multi
{{Discretionary sanctions|gg}}
|date=14 September 2006
{{Old AfD multi |date=14 September 2006 |result='''Delete''' |page=Violence against men |date2=15 October 2011 |result2='''Delete''' |page2=Violence against men (2nd nomination) |date3=8 March 2013 |result3='''Rename''' |page3=Violence against men (3rd nomination) |date4=24 February 2015 |result4='''No consensus''' |page4=Violence against men (4th nomination) |date5=14 May 2013 |result5='''Keep''' |page5=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 May 14#Violence against men |date6=26 August 2022 |result6='''Speedy keep''' |page6=Violence against men (5th nomination)}}
|result='''Delete'''
{{WikiProject banner shell|1=
|page=Violence against men
{{WikiProject Anthropology |class=C |importance=Mid}}

{{WikiProject Biology |class=C |importance=Mid}}
|date2=15 October 2011
{{WikiProject Crime |class=C |importance=High
|result2='''Delete'''
| b1 = <yes/no> <!--Referencing & citations-->
|page2=Violence against men (2nd nomination)
| b2 = <yes/no> <!--Coverage & accuracy-->

| b3 = <yes/no> <!--Structure-->
|date3=8 March 2013
| b4 = <yes/no> <!--Grammar & style-->
|result3='''Rename'''
| b5 = <yes/no> <!--Supporting materials-->}}
|page3=Violence against men (3rd nomination)
{{WikiProject Gender Studies |class=C |importance=Top}}

{{WikiProject Law |class=C |importance=Mid}}
|date4=24 February 2015
{{WikiProject Medicine |class=C |importance=Mid}}
|result4='''No consensus'''
{{WikiProject Psychology |class=C |importance=Mid}}
|page4=Violence against men (4th nomination)
{{WikiProject Sociology |class=C |importance=Mid}}

|date5=14 May 2013
|result5='''Keep'''
|page5=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 May 14#Violence against men

|date6=26 August 2022
|result6='''Speedy keep'''
|page6=Violence against men (5th nomination)}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|collapsed=yes|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Anthropology |importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Biology |importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Gender studies|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Law |importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Medicine |importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Men's Issues|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Psychology |importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Sociology |importance=Mid}}
}}
}}
{{Annual readership|days=90}}
{{Annual readership|days=90}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 75K
|maxarchivesize = 75K
|counter = 3
|counter = 4
|minthreadsleft = 3
|minthreadsleft = 3
|minthreadstoarchive = 0
|minthreadstoarchive = 0
Line 30: Line 48:
|target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes
|target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes
}}
}}
{{archives|index=Archive index|archive_age=60|archive_units=days|archive_bot=lowercase sigmabot III}}__TOC__

==Wiki Education assignment: Global LGBTQ Rights and Representation==
==Wiki Education assignment: Global LGBTQ Rights and Representation==
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Loyola_Marymount_University/Global_LGBTQ_Rights_and_Representation_(Spring_2022) | assignments = [[User:Ryankirzner22|Ryankirzner22]] | reviewers = [[User:Laurencraven|Laurencraven]] | start_date = 2022-01-11 | end_date = 2022-04-29 }}
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Loyola_Marymount_University/Global_LGBTQ_Rights_and_Representation_(Spring_2022) | assignments = [[User:Ryankirzner22|Ryankirzner22]] | reviewers = [[User:Laurencraven|Laurencraven]] | start_date = 2022-01-11 | end_date = 2022-04-29 }}


== Implementing RFC closure ==
== Edit request ==

Following {{u|S Marshall}}'s closure of the RfC above (for which, many thanks), we should probably figure out how to modify the article based on the closure. As far as I understood (please correct me if I'm misinterpreting, {{u|S Marshall}}), the closure 1) does not find consensus for a removal of all circumcision content ({{tq|this discussion doesn't quite reach a consensus|q=y}}) 2) finds that forced circumcision of adults especially in Sub-Saharan Africa is reasonable to discuss in the article, and 3) circumcision of infants should ''not'' be described as violence against men.

Based on this closure, I propose we keep the current first para of § Forced circumcision as-is:
{{tq2|Forced circumcision is the [[circumcision]] of men and children against their will.<ref name="glass">{{cite journal|first=Michael|last=Glass|title=Forced circumcision of men (abridged)|journal=Journal of Medical Ethics|doi=10.1136/medethics-2013-101626|date=September 2013|volume=40 |issue=8 |pages=567–571 |pmid=24014634 |s2cid=40529183 |url=https://zenodo.org/record/895709 }}</ref> Forced circumcisions have occurred in a wide range of situations, most notably in the [[Forced conversion to Islam|compulsory conversion of non-Muslims to Islam]]<ref>{{cite book|title=Religion, Secular Beliefs, and Human Rights: 25 Years after the 1981 Declaration|first=Natan|last=Lerner|year=2006|publisher=Brill|page=142}}</ref> and more recently especially in Kenya.<ref name="ahlberg">{{cite journal|author1-first=Beth Maina|author1-last=Ahlberg|author2-first=Kezia Muthoni|author2-last=Njoroge|title='Not men enough to rule!': politicization of ethnicities and forcible circumcision of Luo men during the postelection violence in Kenya|journal=Ethnicity & Health|volume=18|issue=5|year=2013|publisher=Taylor & Francis}}</ref><ref name="auchter">{{cite journal|first=Jessica|last=Auchter|title=Forced male circumcision: gender-based violence in Kenya|journal=International Affairs|volume=93|issue=3|year=2017|pages=1339–1356 |doi=10.1093/ia/iix183 }}</ref> In South Africa, custom allows uncircumcised [[Xhosa people|Xhosa]]-speaking men past the age of circumcision (i.e., 25 years or older) to be overpowered by other men and forcibly circumcised.<ref>{{cite book|last=Funani|first=Lumpka Sheila|title=Circumcision among the Ama-Xhosa: A Medical Investigation|page=v|year=1990}}</ref> While some scholars view forced adult male circumcision as (gendered) sexual violence,<ref name="ahlberg" /><ref name="auchter"/> the [[International Criminal Court]] ruled in 2011 that such acts were not "sexual violence," but rather fell under the label of "other inhumane acts".<ref name="glass" />}}

{{reflist-talk}}

As for the second paragraph I'd propose cutting it down to something like the following, which could be appended to the end of the first para if it seems too short to stand alone:

{{tq2|While non-religious routine circumcision has been made illegal in some countries,<ref name=RACP_2010>{{cite web | url=https://www.racp.edu.au/docs/default-source/advocacy-library/circumcision-of-infant-males.pdf | title=Circumcision of Infant Males | publisher=The Royal Australasian College of Physicians | date=Sep 2010 | access-date=11 September 2013 | url-status=live | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150812092333/http://www.racp.edu.au/docs/default-source/advocacy-library/circumcision-of-infant-males.pdf | archive-date=12 August 2015 }}</ref><ref name=WHO_2007_GTDPSA>{{cite web |title=Male circumcision: Global trends and determinants of prevalence, safety and acceptability |year=2007 |publisher=World Health Organization |url=http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/jc1360_male_circumcision_en_0.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151222194858/http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/jc1360_male_circumcision_en_0.pdf |archive-date=22 December 2015 }}</ref> religious circumcision of minors is legal in every [[polity]].<ref name="cohen">{{Cite journal |last=Cohen-Almagor |first=Raphael |date=9 November 2020 |title=Should liberal government regulate male circumcision performed in the name of Jewish tradition? |journal=SN Social Sciences |language=en |volume=1 |issue=1 |pages=8 |doi=10.1007/s43545-020-00011-7 |issn=2662-9283 |quote=<quote omitted for talk> |s2cid=228911544}}</ref> These practices are a subject of ethical debate.<ref name="caga-anan_2011">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=C1T6NrSPD_AC&pg=PA43 |title=Clinical Ethics in Pediatrics: A Case-Based Textbook |vauthors=Caga-anan EC, Thomas AJ, Diekema DS, Mercurio MR, Adam MR |date=8 September 2011 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-17361-2 |page=43 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160118224324/https://books.google.com/books?id=C1T6NrSPD_AC&pg=PA43 |archive-date=18 January 2016 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="knmg.artsennet.nl2">[http://knmg.artsennet.nl/web/file?uuid=579e836d-ea83-410f-9889-feb7eda87cd5&owner=a8a9ce0e-f42b-47a5-960e-be08025b7b04&contentid=77976&elementid=771754 Non-Therapeutic Circumcision of Male Minors] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120513191812/http://knmg.artsennet.nl/web/file?uuid=579e836d-ea83-410f-9889-feb7eda87cd5&owner=a8a9ce0e-f42b-47a5-960e-be08025b7b04&contentid=77976&elementid=771754 |date=2012-05-13 }}. Utrecht: Royal Dutch Medical Association, 2010.</ref><ref name="resolution2">{{cite web|author=Nordic Association of Children's Ombudsmen | title=Let the boys decide for themselves|url=https://www.crin.org/en/library/news-archive/male-circumcision-nordic-ombudspersons-seek-ban-non-therapeutic-male|date=30 September 2013|access-date=22 October 2013|archive-date=19 February 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140219031326/http://www.crin.org/en/library/news-archive/male-circumcision-nordic-ombudspersons-seek-ban-non-therapeutic-male}}[] Tuesday, 1 October 2013</ref>}}

{{reflist-talk}}

The goal here would be to briefly cover both the existence of the ethical debate identified in the closure, while noting that religious circumcision of minors indeed remains legal everywhere.

As for the ''location'' of this text, I'd prefer to keep it as a distinct section: while it certainly touches on sexuality, some of the RS explicitly state it's not "sexual violence". Similarly, it appears to not be universally war-related. If a section on religious violence was to be written, there's probably an argument to be made to include it there, but having this as the only content of such a section seems not quite right. If kept as a separate section, I trust there's not objection to the {{tl|main}}.

How does this strike others as a first step? [[User:Ljleppan|''Ljleppan'']] ([[User talk:Ljleppan|talk]]) 18:20, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

:I haven't rigorously dug through the history, but I believe the circumcision content was added within the past few months and has been under debate ever since. Per [[WP:NOCON]], shouldn't it be removed? [[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] ([[User talk:Firefangledfeathers|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Firefangledfeathers|contribs]]) 18:27, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
::I was under the opposite impression, but I haven't done a great survey of the history either. I'll take a look. [[User:Ljleppan|''Ljleppan'']] ([[User talk:Ljleppan|talk]]) 18:31, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
:::A quick check shows it being added in 2016 with [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Violence_against_men&oldid=728158357#Forced_circumcision this edit]. As far as I can determine, the timeline is 1) added in 2016 2) removed a month or two ago, 3) removal discussed on talk 4) no clear consensus for removal, reinstated 5) the RFC above to more formally gauge consensus 6) the present. [[User:Ljleppan|''Ljleppan'']] ([[User talk:Ljleppan|talk]]) 18:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
::::Thanks. Looks like it was removed in August 2022 and that removal has been disputed ever since. I agree the content should stay per [[WP:NOCON]]. Hopefully we can refocus the content on wartime forced circumcision per the closer. [[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] ([[User talk:Firefangledfeathers|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Firefangledfeathers|contribs]]) 18:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

*It is widely believed, but not necessarily always true, that [[WP:NOCON]] crystallizes disputed content in its current form. NOCON is policy, but so is [[WP:V|verifiability]], which says [[WP:ONUS|here]] that ''the onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.'' In other words, where there isn't consensus, policies conflict. In this case I would suggest a fudge. The disputed information could be presented more briefly and given less prominence, as for example a paragraph without its own heading.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S&nbsp;Marshall</b>]]&nbsp;<small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 19:23, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
*:I have no problem moving the content to another section in principle, but none of the other sections really seem like great fits. Certainly, that is an artifact of the article writing process at large: after all, if one of them ''was'' a great fit, someone would presumably have already moved it a long time ago. I wouldn't object to a larger restructuring of the content or if someone has a good idea of what that better structure would be, but in the interim I hope we can rather quickly do some initial edits to the prose itself (potentially along the lines I suggested above). [[User:Ljleppan|''Ljleppan'']] ([[User talk:Ljleppan|talk]]) 19:38, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
*::S Marshall, I think you've gotten it massively wrong here. A total absence of verifiability runs in absolute contradiction of the most fundamental and basic requirement for material to be included in Wikipedia. [[User:Tambor de Tocino|Tambor de Tocino]] ([[User talk:Tambor de Tocino|talk]]) 22:36, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
* This is all original research we are discussing here. You all ignore the fact that there are no reliable sources backing the claim and thus no grounds for inclusion. If unverified claims and original research are the order of the day, then Wikipedia is pretty much worthless. No reliable sources have been provided, but we're just going to include a whole heap of original research. And you guys probably wonder why Wikipedia struggles to attract editors these days. All this original research and opinion being included here has really made me question the value of contributing to Wikipedia. Best of luck with the article, no doubt it will be a load of unverifiable opinion at this rate - a list of violent acts involving men, things that Wikipedia editors have decided are gendered violence in their opinions, to hell with what reliable sources actually say - that is a farce. [[User:Tambor de Tocino|Tambor de Tocino]] ([[User talk:Tambor de Tocino|talk]]) 01:30, 3 November 2022 (UTC)


Change:
*This proposal is excellent; trims away the cruft, but keeps relevant stuff. I'd propose rewording the first sentence to:
:{{tq2|Forced circumcision is the [[circumcision]] of men against their will, and of children without parental consent.}}
:Or something along those lines. As an uninvolved editor, who never edited this page nor participated in the RfC above, but just came across it as a reader, I found this sentence confusing. I strongly oppose removal of the section, obviously, given the lack of consensus and the fact that comprehensive coverage of the topic IMO necessitates inclusion.
:I also support the cut-down second paragraph as-proposed; quite a lot of readers likely ''expect'' the article to include routine circumcision as gender-based violence, and your proposal makes it clear most medical organizations do not include it. Here again, the article wouldn't be comprehensive without this. Going deeper into the specifics of the debate would be undue. [[User:DFlhb|DFlhb]] ([[User talk:DFlhb|talk]]) 02:17, 3 November 2022 (UTC)


"While females do assault males, males are far more frequently perpetrators and are significantly more likely to injure, harm or kill their partners."
==Ethical questions about circumcision ≠ circumcision as mutilation ==


To:
A few editors have attempted to state that it's a mainstream view within the medical community that circumcised penises are "mutilated" — a term that implies sexual dysfunction. This seems [[WP: Undue]]. It's true that there's substantive ethical controversy over circumcision. But that's ''different'' than stating that circumcised penises are ''mutilated''. The vast majority of reliable sources term the notion an example of [[WP: Fringe]]. Users can view the [[ethics of circumcision]] and [[circumcision]] articles for controversies specifically related to the topic. [[User:KlayCax|KlayCax]] ([[User talk:KlayCax|talk]]) 07:31, 3 December 2022 (UTC)


"The CDC's National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey during 2016-2017 found that men and women experience intimate partner violence at a similar rate, with 42.3% of men and 42.0% of women reporting having experienced physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime, and 5.5% of men and 4.5% of women reporting it in the 12 months prior to the survey. For severe violence, 24.6% of men and 32.5% of women reported lifetime exposure, and 3.0% of men and 3.1% of women reported exposure in the 12 months prior to the survey."
:Thanks for your edits. I think a heading of some type is still required, since the forced circumcisions being discussed are not necessarily (at least always) sexual violence, as evidenced by the RS cited. Perhaps a subhead? That would also give us a place to tack on a {{tl|main}} and {{tl|see also}}.
:The post-RfC discussion above also seemed to broadly support including a short blurb on other circumcision to explain to the reader that those types of acts are not included in what is discussed here. See the second (two-sentence) block-quote under {{section link||Implementing RFC closure}}. Optimally, we'd end that blurb with something like {{tq|... but are not considered forced circumcision by most medical practitioners|q=y}}, but I'm not sure what to cite that to. If you have any suggestions, or a good citation for that last bit, that would be great. [[User:Ljleppan|''Ljleppan'']] ([[User talk:Ljleppan|talk]]) 09:06, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
:: Sorry, I didn't see this until now {{re|Ljleppan}}.
:: {{tqi|"but are not considered forced circumcision by most medical practitioners"}} Do we have a quote to cite on this? What would the definition of "forced circumcision" in this be? Usually parents are referred as ''assenting'' to routine circumcision rather than ''consenting'' to circumcision. Thus, while not necessarily ''forced'', the sentence is semi-problematic.
:: It's just that ''other factors'' than consent are believed to outweigh this loss of autonomy. [[User:KlayCax|KlayCax]] ([[User talk:KlayCax|talk]]) 20:59, 24 December 2022 (UTC)


Citation: <nowiki>https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs/NISVSReportonIPV_2022.pdf</nowiki> (page 5)
== More unverifiable claims about circumcision ==


[[Special:Contributions/81.234.111.171|81.234.111.171]] ([[User talk:81.234.111.171|talk]]) 13:16, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi, another editor is trying to insert unverifiable claims that circumcision is "violence against men". I went through the entire citation, nowhere does it describe circumcision as violence against me, it is therefor an unverified claim. I've asked them to bring to talk, one can only hope. Here's the cite provided that does not verify the claim if anyone else wants to check: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22114254/ [[User:Tambor de Tocino|Tambor de Tocino]] ([[User talk:Tambor de Tocino|talk]]) 07:10, 22 April 2023 (UTC)


:To further explain the reasons for this edit:
:I used that citation as a way of specifically explaining and verifying how involuntary circumcision in children and infants can manifest emotional and psychological issues in men who did not want it performed on them and whom were not able to consent to it themselves; which was a part of the paragraph I was attempting to add. My updated citation in support of that is a medical journal from a .gov site as well.
:* The reference for the original text is very old and several newer publications from the same source have shown the opposite. I propose using the latest available.
:* The original text makes an absolute statement based on a single survey when other surveys showing the opposite result. I propose describing the survey findings instead of making an absolute statement.
:* The original text is awkwardly written and sounds argumentative to me.
:[[Special:Contributions/81.234.111.171|81.234.111.171]] ([[User talk:81.234.111.171|talk]]) 13:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
::There are a few things to consider:
::# This is well sourced, but a problem is that it is specifically about the United States instead of the whole world. So if you want to include this information, it should say that it is specifically about the United States.
::# Consensus on [[Domestic violence]] is that {{tqi|Worldwide, the victims of domestic violence are overwhelmingly women}}. Note the "worldwide", so emphasis would need to be placed on the United States.
::# I think that your suggested text would need to be shortened as it's a bit academic. For example we don't need the statistics on 12 months prior to the survey.
::—<span style="font-family:Poppins, Helvetica, Sans-serif;">[[User:Panamitsu|Panamitsu]]</span> [[User_talk:Panamitsu|(talk)]] 00:38, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
:::Thanks for your reply.
:::# I agree. I think it would be a good idea to include "in the United States" after "at a similar rate". The text that's currently on the page suffers from this problem to an even greater extent because it also uses a reference that only refers to the US, but doesn't mention US-specific things such as the CDC and NISVS.
:::# While I think it's fine to keep the paragraph focused on the US because that's where the highest quality research seems to have been made, an option would be to also add a paragraph with examples of places where research has indicated that men or women are over-represented as victims, if you think that's important for balance. I would prefer not to do that because the article is about violence against men, not the relative prevalence of violence against men compared to women. That's why I think just removing the sentence I want to change would be a good option as well. The more I think about it, the more I think it would be my preferred option. Nevertheless, here is a paper comparing intimate partner violence among men and women in six European cities: <nowiki>https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00038-015-0663-1</nowiki> (full text can be accessed on Sci-Hub) Although, if there is similar research from the developing world (even if it only shows women as over-represented), it might be even better if balance is the goal.
:::# I disagree with removing the 12-month statistics. I think those are the most relevant because people are more likely to accurately recall something that happened recently and because the 12-month statistics likely give a better view of the current situation as opposed to the situation decades ago when the violence captured by the lifetime statistic may have occurred.
:::[[Special:Contributions/81.234.111.171|81.234.111.171]] ([[User talk:81.234.111.171|talk]]) 12:58, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
::::Having though about this some more, I think it would be okay to not include the 12-month statistics. While I still think including them would be better, I don't think it would be wrong or misleading to leave them out. Perfection is not necessary.
::::With those changes the paragraph could look like this:
::::"The CDC's National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey during 2016-2017 found that men and women experience intimate partner violence at a similar rate in the United States, with 42.3% of men and 42.0% of women reporting having experienced physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime, and 24.6% of men and 32.5% of women reporting having experienced severe violence."
::::Or:
::::"The CDC's National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey during 2016-2017 found that men and women experience intimate partner violence at a similar rate in the United States, with 42.3% of men and 42.0% of women reporting having experienced physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime. For severe violence, 24.6% of men and 32.5% of women reported lifetime exposure."
::::Or some grammatical variation of the above.
::::It may also be a good idea to add something from other parts of the world where the statistics look different, and perhaps a paragraph discussing the potential causes of such differences. The study I linked to touched briefly on how differences observed in the status of women and men in society could relate to differences in victimization and perpetration, and it cites some other studies that seem to talk about that in more detail. I don't think we need to look at that before making this change. I'm just noting this as something that could potentially be done to make the article even better after this improvement. [[Special:Contributions/81.234.111.171|81.234.111.171]] ([[User talk:81.234.111.171|talk]]) 01:42, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
:::::Thanks for your co-operation. I think another issue is that it says "found that men and women experience intimate partner violence at a similar rate in the United States", which might count as an [[WP:EDITORIAL|editorial]] or [[WP:OR|original research]] as the source doesn't exactly say that. Removing it isn't much of an issue though because the numbers speak for themselves. So modifying your paragraph, that'd make it:
:::::"The CDC's National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey during 2016-2017 found 42.3% of men and 42.0% of women reported having experienced physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime. For severe violence, 24.6% of men and 32.5% of women reported lifetime exposure." —<span style="font-family:Poppins, Helvetica, Sans-serif;">[[User:Panamitsu|Panamitsu]]</span> [[User_talk:Panamitsu|(talk)]] 02:19, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
::::::Yes, I agree with that. Thank you. [[Special:Contributions/81.234.111.171|81.234.111.171]] ([[User talk:81.234.111.171|talk]]) 02:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
:::::::I'm going to let other editors chime in from now, so I won't add the text myself. Please pay attention to this page and if no editors share their opinions, let me know and I'll put this on a noticeboard. —<span style="font-family:Poppins, Helvetica, Sans-serif;">[[User:Panamitsu|Panamitsu]]</span> [[User_talk:Panamitsu|(talk)]] 02:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
::::::::It has been a week now, and nobody else has shared their opinion. [[Special:Contributions/81.234.111.171|81.234.111.171]] ([[User talk:81.234.111.171|talk]]) 23:01, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::I'll add it to the article then. —<span style="font-family:Poppins, Helvetica, Sans-serif;">[[User:Panamitsu|Panamitsu]]</span> [[User_talk:Panamitsu|(talk)]] 00:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::Thanks! I will move the text from the sexual violence section to the domestic violence section and use it to replace the sentence starting with "While females" as described above. [[Special:Contributions/81.234.111.171|81.234.111.171]] ([[User talk:81.234.111.171|talk]]) 02:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)


==Wiki Education assignment: Psychology of Gender==
:I reverted things because another user (Dr vulpes) gave me the go-ahead on the IP user [[User_talk:50.50.253.201|50.50.253.201]] when I wasnt logged in, so long as I found a better source, which I believed I did. I was using it to cite my point regarding psychological harm as stated above.
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Illinois_Institute_of_Technology/Psychology_of_Gender_(Spring_2024) | assignments = [[User:Jpilapil1|Jpilapil1]] | start_date = 2024-01-08 | end_date = 2024-04-28 }}


<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by [[User:Zisha68|Zisha68]] ([[User talk:Zisha68|talk]]) 02:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC)</span>
:In the edit history I explained my reasoning behind adding the paragraph I wrote and why I thought it would make sense here as an example of violence against men with the fact that there is a page on the side bar here specifically linking to the page Forced Circumcision, a page which mentions routine infant circumcision as an example of nonconsensual forced circumcision. Forced circumcision is listed on the sidebar here as an example of violence against men. [[User:RadioHobbyist|RadioHobbyist]] ([[User talk:RadioHobbyist|talk]]) 07:37, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
::That cite does not describe circumcision as violence against men. The current claims are unverified, and that’s bad enough. [[Special:Contributions/114.198.98.163|114.198.98.163]] ([[User talk:114.198.98.163|talk]]) 08:47, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
:::It still describes what I was citing it for, I was citing it in order to backup what I was talking about regarding the emotional harms of something that in other contexts here had been described as an act of violence against men. It's incredibly hard too to find something on this matter that actively describes it as being Violence Against Men when RIC is so incredibly normalized. [[User:RadioHobbyist|RadioHobbyist]] ([[User talk:RadioHobbyist|talk]]) 08:54, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
::::[https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/j_med_ethics-2013-svoboda-469-74.pdf This] source, a journal of medical ethics from Yale (One of the best universities in the US for context), doesnt call it "violence against men" specifically but it still calls RIC violence on multiple occasions as well as going as far as to call it a violation of human rights; and in this context it entirely affects people that're born male. I'd consider this a valid source as it's a medical journal from one of the best universities in the country and it cites it's own sources as well. Some things in it I don't quite think I agree with but I am not educated enough on some of said topics either to make a reasonable judgment other than knowing that it otherwise seems like a valid source alongside the other source I cited for what I was trying to add here. Yes there was a circumcision talk in here before but that doesnt mean we should barely mention it at all if we want to improve this page and make it truly informative. May I add this as a citation and restore my edit? I'm not trying to cause an edit war. [[User:RadioHobbyist|RadioHobbyist]] ([[User talk:RadioHobbyist|talk]]) 09:57, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:48, 12 August 2024

Wiki Education assignment: Global LGBTQ Rights and Representation

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2022 and 29 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ryankirzner22 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Laurencraven.

Edit request

[edit]

Change:

"While females do assault males, males are far more frequently perpetrators and are significantly more likely to injure, harm or kill their partners."

To:

"The CDC's National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey during 2016-2017 found that men and women experience intimate partner violence at a similar rate, with 42.3% of men and 42.0% of women reporting having experienced physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime, and 5.5% of men and 4.5% of women reporting it in the 12 months prior to the survey. For severe violence, 24.6% of men and 32.5% of women reported lifetime exposure, and 3.0% of men and 3.1% of women reported exposure in the 12 months prior to the survey."

Citation: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs/NISVSReportonIPV_2022.pdf (page 5)

81.234.111.171 (talk) 13:16, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To further explain the reasons for this edit:
  • The reference for the original text is very old and several newer publications from the same source have shown the opposite. I propose using the latest available.
  • The original text makes an absolute statement based on a single survey when other surveys showing the opposite result. I propose describing the survey findings instead of making an absolute statement.
  • The original text is awkwardly written and sounds argumentative to me.
81.234.111.171 (talk) 13:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are a few things to consider:
  1. This is well sourced, but a problem is that it is specifically about the United States instead of the whole world. So if you want to include this information, it should say that it is specifically about the United States.
  2. Consensus on Domestic violence is that Worldwide, the victims of domestic violence are overwhelmingly women. Note the "worldwide", so emphasis would need to be placed on the United States.
  3. I think that your suggested text would need to be shortened as it's a bit academic. For example we don't need the statistics on 12 months prior to the survey.
Panamitsu (talk) 00:38, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply.
  1. I agree. I think it would be a good idea to include "in the United States" after "at a similar rate". The text that's currently on the page suffers from this problem to an even greater extent because it also uses a reference that only refers to the US, but doesn't mention US-specific things such as the CDC and NISVS.
  2. While I think it's fine to keep the paragraph focused on the US because that's where the highest quality research seems to have been made, an option would be to also add a paragraph with examples of places where research has indicated that men or women are over-represented as victims, if you think that's important for balance. I would prefer not to do that because the article is about violence against men, not the relative prevalence of violence against men compared to women. That's why I think just removing the sentence I want to change would be a good option as well. The more I think about it, the more I think it would be my preferred option. Nevertheless, here is a paper comparing intimate partner violence among men and women in six European cities: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00038-015-0663-1 (full text can be accessed on Sci-Hub) Although, if there is similar research from the developing world (even if it only shows women as over-represented), it might be even better if balance is the goal.
  3. I disagree with removing the 12-month statistics. I think those are the most relevant because people are more likely to accurately recall something that happened recently and because the 12-month statistics likely give a better view of the current situation as opposed to the situation decades ago when the violence captured by the lifetime statistic may have occurred.
81.234.111.171 (talk) 12:58, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Having though about this some more, I think it would be okay to not include the 12-month statistics. While I still think including them would be better, I don't think it would be wrong or misleading to leave them out. Perfection is not necessary.
With those changes the paragraph could look like this:
"The CDC's National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey during 2016-2017 found that men and women experience intimate partner violence at a similar rate in the United States, with 42.3% of men and 42.0% of women reporting having experienced physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime, and 24.6% of men and 32.5% of women reporting having experienced severe violence."
Or:
"The CDC's National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey during 2016-2017 found that men and women experience intimate partner violence at a similar rate in the United States, with 42.3% of men and 42.0% of women reporting having experienced physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime. For severe violence, 24.6% of men and 32.5% of women reported lifetime exposure."
Or some grammatical variation of the above.
It may also be a good idea to add something from other parts of the world where the statistics look different, and perhaps a paragraph discussing the potential causes of such differences. The study I linked to touched briefly on how differences observed in the status of women and men in society could relate to differences in victimization and perpetration, and it cites some other studies that seem to talk about that in more detail. I don't think we need to look at that before making this change. I'm just noting this as something that could potentially be done to make the article even better after this improvement. 81.234.111.171 (talk) 01:42, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your co-operation. I think another issue is that it says "found that men and women experience intimate partner violence at a similar rate in the United States", which might count as an editorial or original research as the source doesn't exactly say that. Removing it isn't much of an issue though because the numbers speak for themselves. So modifying your paragraph, that'd make it:
"The CDC's National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey during 2016-2017 found 42.3% of men and 42.0% of women reported having experienced physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime. For severe violence, 24.6% of men and 32.5% of women reported lifetime exposure." —Panamitsu (talk) 02:19, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree with that. Thank you. 81.234.111.171 (talk) 02:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to let other editors chime in from now, so I won't add the text myself. Please pay attention to this page and if no editors share their opinions, let me know and I'll put this on a noticeboard. —Panamitsu (talk) 02:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It has been a week now, and nobody else has shared their opinion. 81.234.111.171 (talk) 23:01, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add it to the article then. —Panamitsu (talk) 00:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I will move the text from the sexual violence section to the domestic violence section and use it to replace the sentence starting with "While females" as described above. 81.234.111.171 (talk) 02:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Psychology of Gender

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 January 2024 and 28 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jpilapil1 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Zisha68 (talk) 02:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]