Talk:Feminist sexology

message: ==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment==
 This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ronswansong.
==Lead Section==
It seems that the lead section is okay. It would be beneficial to summarize the important points that are outlined in the article in addition to just the brief overview. It would also be beneficial to add why this topic is notable. --CyanCaribou (talk) 16:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: It seems that the lead section is okay. It would be beneficial to summarize the important points that are outlined in the article in addition to just the brief overview. It would also be beneficial to add why this topic is notable. --CyanCaribou (talk) 16:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead Section

message: Changes were made to the page as it was missing many key details and did not use language that was entirely neutral. Information was expanded upon. as in all cases, it can be expanded even further, but this is a start.  --Jynxedphoenix 19:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I assume this section is meant to present the views of feminist sexologists without a lot of needless repetition of "according to X"; nonetheless, some in-text attribution would be helpful so the text doesn't come across as arguments being presented in Wikipedia's voice. Thoughts? --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 06:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main points 

message: This article has some NPOV issues including:
* Gayle Rubin is quoted a lot but surely others in this field have expressed views that can be included alongside her views.
* The article at times mentions the views of Feminist Sexology professors and thinkers and such in a way that could mislead readers into thinking there views represent a consensus in the scientific community when in fact when it comes to feminist studies i general, many feminist theories currently lack a general consensus among psychological and sociological researchers as to the degree of their validity, if any.
* We need to make sure that when discussing feminist sexology viewpoints that we don't use the Wikipedia voice to give credence to viewpoints still under debate. We should state who holds these views but not imply they are valid or invalid so long as no consensus exists regarding them in the larger sexology or other relevant scientific communities.
* I noticed that this article talks about sexology in a way that fails to mention the debates that formed the basis of the sex wars in the late 70's and 80's and which still continue today between 2nd wave radical feminists and 3rd wave sex-positive and other 3rd wave non-radical feminists. Surely, debates over porn, consensual sex work participation, sexual liberation, etc touch on sexology as a field of study and thus feminist sexology specifically. How does feminist sexology deal with issues like woman enjoying or freely participating in porn by choice? What about issues of whether women freely engaging in sex with lots of men is problematic from a patriarchy standpoint as radical feminists like Catharine MacKinnin and the late Andrea Dworkin have argued?
Notcharliechaplin (talk) 20:56, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV issues with article 

message: It could also be beneficial to add some media or images to provide visuals to the readers, as this article is mostly just text. --CyanCaribou (talk) 16:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Other comments

message: — Assignment last updated by Oxtmilk (talk) 02:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: African American Studies