Talk:Cowardice

message: I removed reference to Dastard, Dastardness, Dastardliness in the opening sentence. OP equated these terms to Cowardice -- they are not equal.  Even the linked Wiktionary entry for Cowardice does not link these terms directly.  Dastardliness is specific a specific manifestation of Cowardice, a "mean, mean-spirited cowardice", or cowardice with malicious intent. Also, if you want to make references to similar terms, don't do it in the opening sentence.  67.160.119.38 (talk) 20:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed extraneous reference in opening sentence

message: I just removed the "legal definition" because a reading of UCMJ subchapter X, section 899, (http://www.military-network.com/main_ucmj/SUBCHAPTERX.html#892.92) shows that this section defines "misbehavior before the enemy", one part of which is "cowardly conduct". Cowardly conduct, as such, is never defined. Claiming that list items #1 through 4 and #6 through 9 constitute a definition of cowardice or cowardly conduct (list item #5) is as logically flawed as claiming that the other 8 articles constitute a definition of list item #4 (which would have ludicrous implications such as causing false alarms being part of the definition of casting away one's arms or munitions. In fact, items 1 to 9 are all different points (not each other's definitions) and my suspicion is that cowardly conduct, due to its rather vague/subjective nature, serves as the catchall for any act no one thought to list explicitly before it happened... If anyone knows of an actual legal definition of cowardice from any source (military or otherwise), it would be great to have on the page.
--BadLeprechaun (talk) 07:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal Defintion 

message: This page as it currently stands does not cover the subject matter in any sort of satisfactory manner. Hence I have taken the following steps I have introduced difinition more corcordant with its everyday meaning and seperated the old introduction into a new catholic paragraph. I have reintroduced sections on military law as it is relevant however I have not attempt to produce a legal difinition. I have removed the terroism section as it is not relevant to a discussion of cowardice. I have added major reconstruction template. I have revised the links to other articles to be more appropriate. I ask only this firstly please attempt to develop the article do not simply take the safe option and revert back and lable as vandalism I know my work is extremely rough it is meant to provide a start point to move towards an improved article. I know the working is very rough but expand out on the points and in a week we will have a far better article then what was originally here. Secondly if you feel reverts are needed again I stress my own work is very rough and easily improved upon then do a full revert look at what was there and what has been added and carefully change as appropriate, please do not revert terroism section it simply does not belong here. I sorry that I've taken to it with all the subtlety of a butcher but lets work to bring it up to standard now, this was a refocus back onto the topic I'm the first to admit my editing skills so please do a better job.
Also apart from expanding on whats there and bringing it up to code we need paragraphs on cowardice from other cultural, social or philosophical perspectives anyway have fun. 
--219.89.8.32 (talk) 06:27, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Major rework

message: I removed the link to Eddie Slovik. It is hardly becoming of an encyclopaedia to single out one instance of wartime desertion, and a highly debated one at that, as an example of cowardice. The Slovik article linked to, and the references within it, made it clear that Slovik was not an unreconstructed coward, and certainly not the only coward of the Second World War.
Jjgull (talk) 11:02, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Eddie Slovik

message: I was trying to think of recent or historical usages of this word in reference to females.  It seemed to me, that the word was related to to fleeing or avoiding battle -- something that in the time the word may have first been used (1000-1100?) to modern times has, officially, been the sole domain of men.  I.e. it seems like it is a dereliction of a duty that has excluded women since before the word was created.
It's an example of fear in the place of someone or something that is supposed to be "brave" and "fearless".  Can you imagine a cowardly ant or cowardly lamb?  Cowardly lion, though would seem extremely shameful, but cowardly Amazon, would just be mixing a relatively  modern concept with a word predating it by a millennia or more.  
I was thinking about several words related or connected to this one and think they come out of the concept of chivalry that seemed to be cooked up in the late 1st millennia or early 2nd millennia.  As one person pointed out in the talk section -- cowardice might easily be called bravery if it leads the attacked group to survival in spite of odds or perceptions.  Certainly, those who are *demanding* the action (those who are demanding some "brave" and, likely, foolish action in war) would wish to demean anyone who has not laid down their life on command.  But most certainly, the one ordered to lay down their lives would most certainly be male -- i.e. a woman could never be considered cowardly, as it would never be her duty to lay down her life (historically, modern gender related-changes to the contrary).   I believe that in  hyper-masculine cultures (esp. their militaristic subcultures), cowardice is a failure to live up to synthetic, hyper-masculine values that were created to manipulate a portion of the population to lay down their lives for those in power.
Can one think of it as being a natural state of an animal in nature?  I.e. could cowardice exist outside of the expectations of a hierarchical, militarized society?
Astara Athenea (talk) 19:38, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gendered word? Comment 

message: A protected redirect, Coward needs redirect category (rcat) templates added.  Please modify it as follows:
* from this:
#REDIRECT cowardice
* to this:
#REDIRECT Cowardice

* 
The  template is used to sort redirects into one or more categories.  When  and/or  suffice, the Redirect category shell template will detect the protection level(s) and categorize the redirect automatically.  (Also, the categories will be automatically removed or changed when and if protection is lifted, raised or lowered.)  Thank you in advance!  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  09:55, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you so much again, Jo-Jo Eumerus, and Happy Holidays!  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  02:29, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fully protected edit request on 3 December 2017 

message: Please categorize Coward (not cowardice) as :Category:Pejorative terms for people. Dpleibovitz (talk) 17:33, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:30, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 13 January 2018