Talk:Postmodern feminism

message: This article is extraordinarily POV. The final paragraph needs extensive editing. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the subject to fix it. GenericGabriel 21:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: The question of postmodern feminism is a vexed one.  I say this because of the definitions of post-feminism the first being "after feminism" the second being "postmodern, poststructural, postfeminsim".Wright, E. (2003). "Lacan and Postfeminism (Postmodern Encounters)".  Whether this article should exist seperately from postfeminism is a moot point - IMHO they should be merged.  From a Gender studies expert point of view, Frug's work is over emphasized. Frug's conclusions about "sex" are to similar to Judith Butler's to give her work this amount of emphasis.--Cailil 01:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frug & an expert opinion 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Postmodern feminism. 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/20130701074409/https://sites.google.com/a/umich.edu/lawmjgl/publications/volume-4-issue-1 to https://sites.google.com/a/umich.edu/lawmjgl/publications/volume-4-issue-1
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) 19:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Can someone explain or expand the 'Bornstein' section; specifically how it relates to 'Origins and theory'. Where are they cited as creating the term or expanding on its theory?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.168.59.54 (talk) 05:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bornstein 

message: This Talk page is was in a confused state, due to a large amount of article text pasted into the page, missing signatures or signatures removed and then readded, as well as interleaved edits in the middle of previous edits by the same or other editors.  Please read the talk page guidelines at WP:TALK and pay attention to how to respond to previous edits using colons for indentation, and proper threading.  Do not interrupt or change the text or comments that anybody else added to the page; leave it as it is, right or wrong.  You can add your own comments after their comments, following proper threading technique.  It's okay to add some proposed text for the article here for discussion, but consider using a sandbox page or a draft page so the Talk page doesn't get too cluttered or taken over with long stretches of article text, or consider using collapse templates  and  to hide long sections of article text by default.  Pinging involved editors  and Shalor. Mathglot (talk) 09:15, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I've collapsed the proposed section of article text, to improve readability of this talk page. Mathglot (talk) 09:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk page edits by student editors 

message: I've removed the section "The link between Post-modern Feminism and Biology (see rev. 894311538 for pevious appearance of page). (Content was added by  in three edits on April 17.)  The subsections were removed because there is no demonstrated connection between them, and the topic, which is "Postmodern feminism" or the section, which is about feminism and biology. In detail:
* lead paragraph – made arbitrary, unsourced claims and assertions like, "a woman's body is more important than ever to her rights as a human".  
* Liberal Feminism – removed this subsection including the three included references. It started off with an okay definition, than veered into some niche assertions about science. But the main objection is, what does this subsection have to do with "the link between Post-modern Feminism and Biology"? Nothing, or at least, nothing is said about it here. Might be appropriate in some other article, or some other section of this article, but not in this "Link between..." section.
* Radical Feminism – removed. "radical feminism rejects the possibility of science from an objective perspective..." and veers off into too much emphasis on scientific institutions. There might be some truth to this, but it's way out of proportion to what radical feminist theorists write about. But beyond that, what's the link here to the section title? As for the case of the "Liberal feminism" section above it, it hasn't been demonstrated.  Doesn't belong in this article, or at least, not here.
* Racial/African-American Feminism – removed. The description given in this subsection is all well and good, but what is the conntection to biology, or to the topic of the article, Postmodern feminism?  There doesn't seem to be any.
Also, please pay attention to recommendations concerning section names, which, among other things, should be in title case (initial cap only, except for nouns normally capitalized in running text). Pinging User:Shalor (Wiki Ed) Mathglot (talk) 09:44, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post-modern Feminism and Biology 

message: I am questioning the inclusion of a photo of Gloria Steinem in this article. Steinem is a critic of postmodern feminism. To include a photo of a critic but no photo of any of the postmodern feminists themselves seems unbalanced. Carol Goudie (talk) 09:58, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo of Gloria Steinem in Critiques section 

message: — Preceding unsigned comment added by ACHorwitz (talk • contribs) 18:33, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture

message: Words speak about sex, and I would add sex between humans, because it seems more complete and acurate. 31.44.144.210 (talk) 09:34, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Within Frug paragraph