Category talk:Feminist Wikipedians

Description change

Hi! The description for this category seems a bit clumsy. I'd go change it right now but maybe we can work out what should happen here. Here are some issues to consider:

• While feminism is very broad - and often phrased as "equal rights for women" to include liberal feminism - I feel there should be at least some mention of opposition to patriarchy. Without this, you are left with a fairly toothless description. Feminism opposes the social forces that elevate men at the expense of women. It is not concerned with simply EXTENDING those privileges to women. It plots their demise.
  • From this, it should be obvious that "gender egalitarianism" doesn't necessarily imply feminism.
• The way transgender people are mentioned as wholly separate from the categories "women" and "men" undermines what the editor who put it there was likely trying to accomplish. A better way would be to (for example) say "cis and trans women", which does not carry the implication that trans people constitute some entirely other gender.
• "who belongs in feminism" is a big question, especially now that we're all coming to terms with the fact that the gender binary does not remotely reflect the gender identities actually present in the world. However, I think - being a women's movement, we can be fairly firm on the fact that men have no place in feminism. They are absolutely welcome to identify as pro-feminist or a feminist ally, which properly delineates how much involvement in feminism is appropriate for men. I would support creating a category for them and anyone else who feels that they would be treading where they shouldn't by identifying as feminist.

In this discussion, I would like you to remember that there is nothing "neutral" about giving ~equal time~ to widespread transphobic sentiments that harm and kill trans people. Thank you for your cooperation ♥

HeatherQuinnell (talk) 15:57, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

I changed the "transgender" to "nonbinary", because that's what stood out to me when I first opened the page, because I think anyone with a basic understanding of trans issues probably understands the need to enforce that binary trans people fall under the categories of "male" and "female". That is not at all to say that the points you raised (esp. about men not really being a part of feminism, which I didn't touch in my edit) are not valid--in fact, I agree with all of them, but I figure we should ensure a greater consensus on them before the page is actually edited to reflect them. Yangosplat222 (talk) 23:09, 23 October 2014 (UTC)