Jump to content

Talk:Femininity

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dave3457 (talk | contribs) at 02:17, 9 May 2019 (→Framing). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Is a criticism section allowed or not?

I just noticed this article does not have one where the article on masculinity does. What is wikipedia's policy on criticism sections? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xanikk999 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Femininity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:00, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Inanna and the lead image

Hello! I am the editor who wrote almost the entire article Inanna and brought it up to GA, so I thought I would comment that whether Inanna symbolizes femininity depends greatly on your definition of the word; she definitely does not embody the traditional English definition of the word as "submissive and subservient," but she would certainly embody a much more modern feminist conception of what a strong woman ought to be like. She was seen as very powerful (in fact, quite terrifyingly so), but she was generally regarded as benevolent (albeit highly capricious). Her domain included a broad diversity of different attributes and, although she was the goddess of love, beauty, sex, and fertility (which are all traditionally considered very feminine), she was also the goddess of war, combat, and political power (about as masculine as you can get); in fact, in the image that is used in the lead, she is actually shown carrying a flail in her right hand. I am not sure which definition of "femininity" this article is going for, but if you are trying to go by the more traditional definition, you would be far better off with the old image of Aphrodite that was here before it was replaced with Inanna. (Coincidentally, I also wrote almost the entire article Aphrodite and recently brought it up to GA as well, so, either way, the image would be of a deity I have written about extensively.) --Katolophyromai (talk) 04:19, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

this is a good point. Can we engage with it? AnaSoc (talk) 06:18, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Katolophyromai, what more is needed in order to change the image? If what you've written is true, the replacement is urgent.--MisterSanderson (talk) 23:45, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@MisterSanderson: I have now replaced the image of Inanna with the painting Venus with a Mirror by Titian, which is very famous and which presents the goddess Aphrodite as the personification of femininity. It certainly represents a more conventional idea of femininity than the Inanna relief, although I am not entirely sure if that is necessarily a good thing. One major problem with the articles femininity and masculinity is that ideas about what is "feminine" and what is "masculine" vary drastically across cultures and belief systems. --Katolophyromai (talk) 00:17, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

feminism sidebar displayed twice

the this article is part of a series on feminism side bar appears near the top (under woman in society) and lower down in the feminist views section. is this intentional? 🌸 𝐖𝐞𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐊 ^ 🌸 10:49, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Weegaweek: I strongly suspect that it was accidental. I actually noticed the exact same thing a few minutes ago before seeing your comment here and I have already removed the first navbox with this edit, leaving the second one where it was. --Katolophyromai (talk) 00:20, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Framing

I've reached this article to read about how hormonal differences between women and men lead to differences in world-view between the sexes. But again, found nothing. Why all articles about sex are totally framed in anatomy + politics? I need objective information, from the Biological and Psychological Sciences, not feminist propaganda.

This article is worse than the other article Woman. This one here presents every information as just a point of view, which is contradicted on the next paragraph. After reading, you get the impressions that no one is sure, or noone is correct in what they are saying.--MisterSanderson (talk) 23:47, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterSanderson: I actually mentioned something similar to this problem in my comment above. The problem is that, while man and woman are mostly biological concepts, "masculinity" and "femininity" are both cultural concepts that vary drastically across cultures and belief systems and, quite simply, no one actually agrees on what either of the two words really mean. All efforts to biologically define what constitutes as "masculine" and "feminine" behavior have been fruitless. Frankly, they are both concepts that we are probably better off just abandoning, but that does make it difficult to write encyclopedia articles about them! --Katolophyromai (talk) 00:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand MisterSanderson's complaint about feminist propaganda here or at Talk:Woman. Also, I disagree that "no one actually agrees on what either of the two words really mean." We can see from the articles that femininity is mainly associated with girls/women and why that is and that masculinity is mainly associated with boys/men and why that is. It is societal/cultural, but it is also linked to biology with regard to behavior; this is because of certain differences between boys and girls/men and women that are, in part, rooted in biology...such as males being more aggressive, which is deemed by society to be more masculine. Femininity and masculinity are part of the nature versus nurture (or rather the nature and nurture) topic. As for the feminism side bar, it belongs in this article whether located at the top or at the bottom. And this article will obviously cover feminist points of views; so MisterSanderson's complaint on that is illogical.
On a side note: Regarding the lead image change, I'm not sure that it's best to go with a partially nude image since we recently had an editor complain about a nude image at the Woman talk page. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:50, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterSanderson, I tried for several days, years ago to bring some objectivity to this page but finally gave up. What you were looking for has been deleted because it conflicts with a common feminist belief that gender is entirely a cultural construct. The real question here is why do many feminists need it to be a cultural construct. Personally I would quote Gloria Steinem when she said "We are becoming the men we wanted to marry". That is the goal of many feminists but if gender is not entirely a cultural construct, that makes their dream to do away with gender and have only "men", impossible.

Dave3457 (talk) 18:26, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dave3457, I'm not sure that "hormonal differences between women and men lead[ing] to differences in world-view between the sexes" was ever in this article. And in any case, the Neuroscience of sex differences article is an article for that topic. And feminist scholars are not the only scholars who see femininity as socially constructed. Also, a compromise was made years ago so that the article's lead states "Femininity is socially constructed, but made up of both socially-defined and biologically-created factors." At some recent point, that was changed to "Femininity is partially socially constructed, being made up of both socially-defined and biologically-created factors." And the article does discuss biology, but this is mainly a social topic. If you reply to me on this, I ask that you don't WP:Ping me. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:50, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Let me clarify. As I said, at the time mentioned years ago,(Feb to April 2009) there was a full court press to remove changes to the page that did not line up is the androgynous side of the feminist movement. I of course support the equality aspect of the movement. I and another guy spent many hours over many days trying to make this page more balanced with regards to the nature vs nurture issue. From what I can tell, since then all of his stuff has been removed. It was a major up hill battle to not have the lead read something like, "Femininity is a social construct." Which of course is the kind of thing you find in your typical gender studies course.
To give you an idea of how this page can be used as a propaganda tool for anti-gender feminists, the 2009 section linked here on Feminine Attributes in part read..."These attributes result from the relationship between an individual's biology and the socialization she receives as a result of that biology. However, theories of femininity explored in the field of Gender Studies propose that femininity and masculinity are essentially constructed or 'performed' through a process of social construction."
In the 2009 section called Feminine Physical Attributes the following each got their own sub-section...Cleavage, Corsets, Foot Binding, High Heels, Eating disorders, Neck rings.
The 2009 section called Femininity in Women only contained four images, they were images of Foot Binding, Neck rings, High Heels and Corsets. I called it the torture gallery.
Dave3457 (talk)

Womanhood

Removed womanhood from the lead sentence in this edit. They are not synonyms, and womanhood does not redirect here. Mathglot (talk) 23:18, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Femininity&oldid=896220793"