Talk:Oneida Community

message: There were initially some forty-five members to the community. The community grew slowly (72 members by February of 1850, 205 by February of 1851, and 306 members by 1878)
What is the benchmark for growth rate? In other words, why is this considered "slow"? --Calieber 15:24, Nov 5, 2003 (UTC)
: What is the source for this population data?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.245.48.161 (talk) 04:49, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Growth 

message: My wife remembers visiting the Mansion house when she was very young. She and her classmates played in the children's house basement among shackles. During the tour, she was told of cages for holding the "undesireables" or deformed. In all the research we have done, we cannot find any record of such children being born or dying. Furthermore, the practice of sex without ejaculation had to have had it's foibles. Why are there no unwanted births whatsoever? A society of 300 should at least have one or two children who were born with defects or aberrations. This needs to be explained.
: Unlike the Pitcairn Islands this was a short-lived community lasting only a few decades.  Unless the members were mostly related to begin with, I see no reason why the deleterious effects of inbreeding could not have been minimized.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.237.111.246 (talk) 09:34, 5 October 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undesireables 

message: This is an extremely bias article that portrays John Noles as some sex crazed manipulator.  There is no evidence supporting this in records and a more objective point of view should be taken.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.102.23.101 (talk) 07:14, 26 June 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your suggestion regarding : regarding :! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to…) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 

message: I think this article needs some pictures of where this civilization was, and of the leading members of it, if they can be found. (Demon Slayer 20:48, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: Noyes is mentioned several times before being introduced at all.  Someone clean this up with some editing?  Dean 18:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format 

message: I take objection to the statement about it generally being accepted at the time that men were spiritually superior to women.  Everything I have ever read on the Oneida community indicates that egalitarianism between the sexes was a prime motivator, including for the practices of complex marriage and male continence (via traditional marriage often being seen as a vehicle of ownership, and via women being necessarily unfree when opressed by unwanted pregnancies).  Can someone please cite a source for the claim that this was a motivator in the Oneida hierarchy?  Mathlaura 01:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misogyny? 

message: Can we have a picture of the women dress?
There is a woman in bloomers and another talking about free love.
Do they look as Perfectionists?
I have entered sections for previous talk postings.
--Error (talk) 00:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The woman in bloomers with a short skirt & short hair looks like she could easily have been part of Oneida. But alas, it would be original research to suppose so. Peaceray (talk) 03:23, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: The part about women enjoying sex lasting longer than one hour seems unnecessary at best; a complete lie at worst. The new citation at that line does not mention it. I'll give a few days for a good source there; but if nothing shows up, I will remove that line. Feels unencyclopedic... AdamChirnside (talk) 17:19, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Wikipedia should encourage the talk-page use of emoticons so we can tell if our leg is being pulled.  Assuming that your citation request for "Many women of the community found male continence to lead to the furtherment of their sexual enjoyment" is made in good faith, I've provided a citation.  It also serves as a second citation for your challenge yesterday of the rest of that sentence, "...as sexual encounters often could last for more than one hour."  In my opinion, the sentence is completely encyclopedic.  Although tempted to, I won't name any examples of tasteless and even horrifying "academic" articles in Wikipedia that are not.  --CliffC (talk) 03:57, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My challenge was in good faith, make no mistake. I just found that the claim seemed based on urban legend, rather than good scientific knowledge. I'm still in the course of studying psychology, so my knowledge is limited at best, but I can vaguely recall hearing claims that run counter to these. In any event, I am probably just being hypervigilant... I really hate urban legends. Maybe we can meet somewhere in the middle with something like "...and sexual encounters often could last..." ? AdamChirnside (talk) 15:39, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what you are suggesting -- the sentence as it stands is well-written, well supported by citations, and fits into the flow of the article; I don't see how it needs any further attention.  --CliffC (talk) 02:08, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it is well written, but it implies causation. The source is not a research study, and is a secondary source. The rest of the sentence is fine, it's just the implication that is still unverified. AdamChirnside (talk) 18:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm still confused.  The Havelock Ellis citation tells us "Prolonged coitus... permitting the woman to have orgasm more than once, while the man has none... is always appreciated by the woman, while it appears to have no bad effect on the man."  If you'll tell us in one sentence exactly what it is you think is being implied but not verified, we can go on from there.   --CliffC (talk) 21:05, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Although he was an expert on the subject, at that time, this is merely his opinion. There is no objective evidence here to suggest that prolonged coitus causes increased sexual enjoyment for women. AdamChirnside (talk) 04:42, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Male Continence 

message: The community is the subject of Blossom Elfman's novel The Strawberry Fields of Heaven'.  Perhaps there should be a section on  OC in literature or in pop culture or some such category.211.225.37.54 (talk) 13:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  literature 

message: I'd like to release into the public domain the photos that I took a year ago, available at: http://robertvienneau.blogspot.com/2008/09/oneida-community-19th-century-commune.html. -- Robert L. Vienneau 209.217.195.168 (talk) 22:24, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snapshots 

message: In 1993, the archives of the community were made available to scholars for the first time. Contained within the archives was the journal of Tirzah Miller, a niece of Noyes who was initiated by him into the system of complex marriage. She reveals in her journal that at the age of 26, after a decade of sexual activity, it was unclear to her whether she was obliged to engage in sex with any man who requested it, regardless of her own personal feelings.
That the archives are available is important information, as is the fact that Noyes' niece wrote a journal. However, this paragraph is biased because, among other things, everyone at Oneida was supposed to be communally married, and at the time the definition of marriage included the idea that sexual consent had been given on a woman's wedding day. The concept of rape within marriage did not even exist until the 1960s in the United States, with most states enacting laws against marital rape between then and the 1990s. That it was unclear to Miller indicates that she had some exposure to the radical feminist notion that women were not required to submit sexually to their husbands, a concept in its infancy and related primarily to women's rights activists and suffragists. The person who inserted this paragraph makes it sound like the Oneida Community was a bunch of cultists who kept their women in sexual slavery. It's ahistorical at best, and the paragraph's author fails to mention that the citation from which the assertion is from mentions that Noyes assured her that she could turn down any man she wanted. Likewise, the paragraph insinuates incest. If the paragraph's author is going to lay a claim of incest against Noyes and the Oneida community, the author should indicate whether New York law forbade marriage between an uncle and a niece. There are several periods of time in US history when states have permitted marriage between uncles/aunts and nieces/nephews or between first cousins, and periods of time in which state law has permitted marriage with people as young as 13. Because there's a biased context happening in this paragraph, and due to insufficient citation, I am removing the latter two sentences. Sandarmoir (talk) 07:37, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  More bias 

message: Here There have apparently been two articles on this topic for five years! The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 23:30, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just created Redirect 

message: "Postmenopausal women were encouraged to introduce teenage males to sex, providing both with legitimate partners that rarely resulted in pregnancies." ...
As opposed to "couldn't have ever resulted in any pregnancies at all", I take it... Can anyone explain to me in graphic detail how a woman can become pregnant without any egg cells being involved.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.112.43.161 (talk) 23:01, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impossible 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Oneida Community. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060905044850/http://www.cis.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1989/1/89.01.04.x.html to http://www.cis.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1989/1/89.01.04.x.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130729144853/http://library.syr.edu/find/scrc/collections/diglib/oneida/ to http://library.syr.edu/find/scrc/collections/diglib/oneida/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:39, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hey  (I know nothing about the subject matter) - strikes me that hte article needs a short summary/background on Noyes right at the top as the first section of the body of the article. Also am generally not a fan of Further reading sections (if sources are so significant, should not they be inlined somewhere?).....just first thoughts.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:20, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks for the feedback! Peaceray (talk) 03:17, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feedback 

message: I've heard it described as both, including here on wikipedia on the retroglade ejaculation (coitus saxonicus) article, while the community's article says reservatus. Just wondering if they did one or the other or both, because if it was only one of them then that should be made clear as they're two different things. 24.44.73.34 (talk) 02:43, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Male continence - coitus reservatus, saxonicus or both? 

message: There is an issue with Tower/Towner in the "Decline" section.
I wanted to add a reference but I am baffled by this system of "shortened footnotes", which seems great but not as easy to use as the usual way of adding a ref.
So... as suggested I ask for help and lacking time for now I'll leave this here:
"A branch of the community, led by James W. Towner, “minister, abolitionist, lawyer, judge, Civil War captain, and decorated hero,” took their bible communism to California in the early 1880s."
https://daily.jstor.org/oneida-community-moves-oc/
--Kai Carver (talk) 05:34, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shortened footnotes 

message: As an experiment, today I asked MS Copilot about what could be improved in this article. Here was its response:
I would note that incorporating primary sources requires following WP:PRIMARYSOURCE. I think the above would be worthwhile. Currently this is graded as a C class using Wikipedia's content assessment, but the predicted quality from ORES rates it as FA or GA. Peaceray (talk) 19:41, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestions from MS Copilot for improvement