Talk:Femininity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Femininity article.
Article policies
align="left" This article is part of WikiProject Gender Studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class.
WikiProject on Sociology This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Femininity, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
LGBT Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Problems with this article

  • Men "continually test the masculinity of their associates"?
  • "Femininity is rooted in . . . early development", but masculinity is "mastered" well into adulthood?
  • Comments on the "fake homosexual women" are just plain confusing, but certainly sounds POV.

Much of this article is well-written, but I think, Endomion, that you've made a few unsupportable statements here. I congratulate you on the work you've done, expanding this in a major way. I just think you've got a few things to tighten up, IMHO. Unschool 06:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Well sue me, I have taken this article up from a little bitty stub. At any rate, it's largely completed and I can fine tune it for NPOV tomorrow maybe. Endomion 06:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Whoa, I think it's good work (didn't I say that?). My objections were largely in the first ¶, and, as I've said, you've done a lot of work. If I thought your writing sucked, I would have made the changes myself. I think you more than deserve the chance to fine-tune it. Good night. Unschool 06:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Okay, thank you, my first remarks were out of line. Endomion 06:55, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Hey, it's okay—as it turns out, my lawyer wouldn't pick up his cell phone anyway. :) Unschool 06:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Not enough about breasts and stuff

I'm surprised at how bad this article is. I just felt I need to complain before attempting to fix it. I'll probably leave some things out, so it should be reviewed by another editor. -Barry- 03:55, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] contrast/opinion

If I was a female, I could be much more masculine than an action-movie lead actor.

[edit] Females have narrow hips?

The article formerly said that "narrow hips in relation to shoulders" is a feminine body trait, apparently indicating that women have relatively narrower hips and wider shoulders than men, which is obviously completely backwards. I changed that. 71.68.75.61 15:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV EDIT REVERTING

Please don't remove my writings just because you have a personal problem with them. Perhaps you could explain to me why my addition to the top of the page was removed, and why you disagree with it.

  • Hi. Your additions are unverifiable because you have not provided sources. Please provide sources when you add material to an article. Otherwise, your additions may be construed as vandalism or deleted for violation of the neutral point of view policy. Srose (talk) 17:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I added a source to the page for my addition. I'd like you to note that it is the ONLY source on the page, and by your 'logic' I could delete anything I want on the entire feminity page because none of it is sourced. Please keep your point of view to yourself, thank you.

  • This is a good point; the article does generally lack sources. However, the text of your edit seemed very POV. Now that it is sourced, I will take a second look and in the mean time look for sources for the rest of the article. Srose (talk) 21:07, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Someone seems to be continually deleteing my entries with bias. My additions to the article can probably be construed as "negative" by most women. In the "women in the media" section, I deleted useless information about celebrities and added an intelligent counter arguement to the feminist arguement presented in the same section. I understand some of you may be having a "Girl Power" moment, but instead of deleting what I'm saying because you don't like it, you instead absorb my information and debate it in your head intelligently. Thank you.

  • (A) The subject matter of your edits are completly inappropriate for the introductoary paragraph of the article. (B) Unless your source represents the scientific consensus in the field, your edits still POV (whether it is your own or that of an expert). Provide context and read the policy. (C) Reasons were given for the reverts and you chose not to respond to them. Instead you've proceeded with an angry, defensive tone. (D) You don't have a right to the sanctity of your edits. If the community rejects them, please do not continue to reinsert them. You did the same over at the Christianity page. Trnj2000 18:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] NPOV warning?

Under "Femininity in men" the follow seems rather POV to me (not saying I disagree with the statement, just that it's POV): "However, while some do exaggerate their femininity, most are only expressing their true personalities and therefore deserve tolerance."

Perhaps this article needs an NPOV warning on the top of the page, considering it seems to be having a lot of POV issues? 129.110.199.43 04:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

This article is definitely not currently written in a NPOV tone, and really needs authoritative references to back some of the statements being made. I'll help by editing and discussing issues here.
Just for starters, the statement: "Distinctly feminine attributes are hard to pin down ... because each attribute can be manifested in either sex." Is an interesting concept. The article isn't about those attributes which are *always* feminine, but those that are commonly attributed to femininity. The goal here isn't to write an article which only a lesbian or transgendered person would be happy with, but to write an article that would describe femininity from the perspective of the general population with sub-sections talking about disputes to the generalizations. DavidBailey 11:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Editing: Femininity in lesbians

Okay, for starters, this whole section has no citations and statements of opinion and even propogation of "stereotypes" as examples. I think we can do better.

While the purported homosexual women depicted in pornography tend to be feminine in the traditional sense of the word, the stereotypical "real" lesbian is imagined as a rather androgynous if not masculine woman who crops her hair short and wears jeans and leather vests (called a butch) however it is argued that this is no more than a perception. (citation needed)

I guess the question is, firstly, is it important to have a lesbian section in an article about femininity? Writing this section from authoritative sources and a NPOV is going to be challenging. I think from the LGBT social movements page the consensus is that the concept of femininity is flawed to begin with. How about we state at the end of the lead section that socially defined qualities are under dispute by the LGBT community and leave it at that? DavidBailey 12:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures?

The article for masculinity has examples of what is and has been masculine through time and what is "acceptable" in society. It'd be a good idea to have the same thing here.User:172.212.120.33 19:07, 26 December 2006 (UTC) Bold text

[edit] Femininity extremely confused with Western beauty ideals

The section on femininity in the media is more about Western beauty ideals than about femininity. For example, one author contradicts herself by citing the "tomboyish" flapper as a "feminine" ideal. In reality, flappers were not manifesting femininity, but rather slightly less physical oppression imposed by the dictates of femininity, as permitted briefly by the dominant culture.Jamidwyer 04:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Jamidwyer

Update: I couldn't leave it like that. I'm not super-attached to what I changed, but I do think changing the section to "Feminine physical attributes" (and eventually adding a section about non-physical attributes that are associated with femininity), is an improvement over mixing up beauty messages from the modern Western media with femininity.

[edit] A few changes

Symmetry is attractive in both men and women, so it isn't specific to femininity. Many people criticize unrealistic beauty ideals for women, not only feminists, and not only radical feminists. Also, one can not be both "boyish" and feminine, by definition, but someone keeps saying so about flappers. This section could really use some biology ("In some cultures, two X chromosomes and a vagina are considered feminine..."). Jamidwyer 06:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Jamidwyer

I agree. We need to start with some biology; perhaps a few words on genetics and the female reproductive system and then moving briskly into secondary sex characteristics. Currently the article is too focused on beauty standards (an important aspect of the topic but we need to cover other stuff too). Haukur 08:52, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't agree with this at all. I am biologist and I have made some changes based on which differences associated with femininity are based on biological differences (breasts, wide hips) and which are not or are some mix of biology and socialization that have yet to be teased apart. Femininity per se is not about the internal organs, but about physical appearance and behavior. A woman with no uterus or ovaries could nontheless seem very feminine, witness men who pass for women. This topic is all about the externals. I think introducing genetics would be kind of red herring here. You don't need two XX chromosomes to be feminine. Not only are there drag queens (or whatever is the polite term) but there are people with XY chromosomes who develop into women because of unusual genetic mutations. They are perfectly capable of appearing feminine. Eperotao 05:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Eperotao, I agree with you and with most of the edits you have made. I am not a biologist, but could you please provide references for biological differences such as "better sense of smell" in women if you have them? I haven't heard of such a difference; one of my areas of interest is perfume, and many of the most famous "noses" and perfumers are male, so this would be rather interesting and indeed somewhat surprising to me. -- TinaSparkle 09:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
On further reflection, you're right. Dictionary definitions tend to say something like: "characteristic of or appropriate or peculiar to women". While the chromosomes and the reproductive system should match that definition very well in practice the word just isn't used like that. Menstrual blood is characteristic of and peculiar to women but it is not considered feminine. Even very good dictionaries seem not to offer a good definition. I can't find any encyclopedia which has an entry for the word either, not even specialized encyclopedias. I'm at a loss, really. We need some solid source to anchor the basic definition in. Once we have that it'll be much easier to add nature/nurture theories, feminist criticism etc. Haukur 11:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dictionary definition

I finally found a dictionary which is at least somewhat helpful.

FEMALE, FEMININE, EFFEMINATE are adjectives that describe women and girls or attributes and conduct culturally ascribed to them. FEMALE, which is applied to plants and animals as well as human beings, is a biological or physiological descriptor, classifying individuals on the basis of their potential or actual ability to produce offspring in bisexual reproduction. It contrasts with MALE in all uses: her oldest female relative; the female parts of the flower. FEMININE refers essentially to qualities or behaviors deemed by a culture or society to be especially appropriate to or ideally associated with women and girls. In American and Western European culture, these have traditionally included features such as delicacy, gentleness, gracefulness, and patience: to dance with feminine grace; a feminine sensitivity to moods. FEMININE is also, less frequently, used to refer to physical features: a lovely feminine figure; small, feminine hands. EFFEMINATE is most often applied derogatorily to men or boys, suggesting that they have character or behavior traits culturally believed to be appropriate to women and girls rather than to men: an effeminate horror of rough play; an effeminate speaking style. See also womanly.

Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, 1996, p. 708. Haukur 13:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Feminism

"Modern women often wear high-heeled shoes that limit their ability to walk long distances or run in ways similar to foot binding."

Wtf? No, seriously, wtf is wrong with you people?

Could this article be any more feminist? Either you've been all brainwashed by the media or you're completely ignorant of difference between Western beauty ideals and natural trait of women to be more aesthetically pleasing than men.

Don't treat femininity as women's archenemy. There are much more positive sides to it than negative. I wish someone wise in those matters could come and write this article from the start because I'm sick of this "oh women are so subordinate to men" bitchy ignorance. 85.94.112.158 18:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)Dex

um highheels look good, they are for beauty and showing off, there shoudl be a larger nod to what popular as physical aspects of femininty.also girls genrally speack in a higer tone them men, and mother hood and pregnancy has a lot to do with w,pem feminity socially and biologially, the biological reason for femine characteristcs need to be underlined eg women are more shapely covered in fat so they can get pregnant.i think the physical and social (including bitchy or cattiness or dominence to men and girl power) aspects of being a women should be more talked about, and not just feminist or gender bashing.this artivle reads like a nanna wrote it as is as dry and biased as anything as it could be. also i want the article to positivly mention the cosmetec aspects of womens feminity as being important to out social exsistance like the apperance of their breasts or like women are ovulating they dress up more to help attract a potential partner.

[edit] One dimensional perspective

One of the most noticeable things about this article is the emphasis on the heterosexual male definition of femininity as opposed to a cultural definition or multiple cultural perspectives. This is especially apparent when compared to the Wikipedia entry on Masculinity which observes masculine identity at multiple levels including things that can be considered inherently or genetically produced and attributes that are cultural ideals. What comes across here then is that, as opposed too how masculine identity is the product of a person's membership in society, feminine identity is only beneficial, necessary, or only exists in relation to a heterosexual male and his sexual attraction to that person.

I believe that this article would benefit from a balance of academic sources rather than so many pop-science articles. Keep in mind that femininity does not equal feminine sexuality. That is a Component of feminine identity, but it is not the totality of it. And if it is, that needs to be acknowledged as a cultural shortcoming in how we perceive female individuals.

Also, the section on male femininity needs heavy editing. There are no citations, it comes across heavily as a personal point of view, and certain sentences are redundant rather than illuminating.

[edit] Genetics

"Masculinity has its roots in genetics"

This is taken from the article on Masculine, so shouldnt there be something about how Feminine has its roots in genetics on this article?